Benchmark: reduce creation - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var data = Array.from({ length: 10000 }).map((_, idx) => idx)

Tests:

spread insert
data.reduce((acc, val) => ({ ...acc, [val]: val }), {})
assign insert
data.reduce((acc, val) => Object.assign(acc, {[val]: val}))
map
Object.fromEntries(data.reduce((acc, val) => acc.set(val, val), new Map()))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
spread insert
assign insert
map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark data and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test measures the performance of three different approaches to inserting values into an object using the `reduce` method in JavaScript. The benchmarks compare:

1. Using the spread operator (`{...acc, [val]: val}`) for insertion.
2. Using `Object.assign()` for insertion.
3. Creating a new Map and setting values on it using the `set()` method.

**Benchmark Definitions**

The benchmark definitions are represented as JSON objects that describe the code to be executed. Each definition includes:

* A JavaScript expression that uses the `reduce` method to process an array of numbers (`data`) and create an object.
* The test name, which indicates the approach being tested (spread insert, assign insert, or map).

Here's a brief explanation of each benchmark definition:

1. `data.reduce((acc, val) => ({ ...acc, [val]: val }), {})`: This code uses the spread operator to create a new object and inserts values into it.
2. `data.reduce((acc, val) => Object.assign(acc, {[val]: val}))`: This code uses `Object.assign()` to merge an existing object with a new object created using the spread operator.
3. `Object.fromEntries(data.reduce((acc, val) => acc.set(val, val), new Map()))`: This code creates a new Map and inserts values into it using the `set()` method.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, no external libraries are used. However, some built-in JavaScript features are utilized:

* `Object.assign()`: A standard JavaScript method for merging objects.
* `Map`: A built-in JavaScript object that maintains key-value pairs.
* Spread operator (`{...}`): A syntax feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None of the benchmark code uses special JavaScript features like async/await, Promises, or modern syntax (e.g., template literals).

**Other Alternatives**

For comparison purposes, other approaches to inserting values into an object could be:

* Using a custom function with loops and objects.
* Utilizing a library like Lodash (`_.assign()`).
* Creating a new object using the `Object.create()` method.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as concise or efficient as the benchmarked approaches.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Spread operator (`{...}`)**:
	* Pros: Concise, readable code.
	* Cons: May incur overhead due to object creation.
2. **`Object.assign()`**:
	* Pros: Efficient and optimized for merging objects.
	* Cons: Can be slower than the spread operator due to function calls.
3. **Map (`set()`) approach**:
	* Pros: Optimized for large datasets, as Map operations are faster.
	* Cons: May require more memory allocation.

The `Map` approach is likely the most efficient way to insert values into an object in this benchmark, followed by the spread operator and then `Object.assign()`.

I hope this explanation helps you understand what's being tested in the MeasureThat.net benchmark!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 121 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
spread insert	141.1 Ops/sec
assign insert	276.3 Ops/sec
map	1481.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

reduce creation (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: spread insert vs assign insert vs map

Created: 9 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

spread insert

assign insert

map

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):