Benchmark: Object.values vs filter(Boolean)

Script Preparation code:

var nbspCharacter = '\u00A0';

var GROUPS = [
  [ -Infinity, 0, `< 1${nbspCharacter}min` ],
  [ 1, 4, `1 - 4${nbspCharacter}min` ],
  [ 5, 14, `5 - 14${nbspCharacter}min` ],
  [ 15, 29, `15 - 29${nbspCharacter}min` ],
  [ 30, 59, `30 - 59${nbspCharacter}min` ],
  [ 60, Infinity, `60${nbspCharacter}min <` ],
];

var entries = [];


for(i=0; i<100; i++){
	entries.push({minutes: Math.floor(Math.random() * 2), count: Math.floor(Math.random() * 10)});
	entries.push({minutes: 30 + Math.floor((Math.random() * 60)), count: Math.floor(Math.random() * 10)});
}

var reducer = (acc, entry) => {
        const { minutes, count } = entry;
        const groupId = GROUPS.findIndex(([ min, max ]) => {
          return minutes >= min && minutes <= max;
        });

        acc[groupId] = {
          x: GROUPS[groupId][2] || (GROUPS[groupId].map((v) => `${v}${nbspCharacter}min`).join(' - ')),
          count: parseInt((acc?.[groupId]?.count ?? 0), 10) + parseInt(count, 10),
        };

        acc[groupId].y = acc[groupId].count;

        return acc;
 }

Tests:

Object.values
Object.values(entries.reduce(reducer, {}))
filter(Boolean)
entries.reduce(reducer, []).filter(Boolean);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Object.values
filter(Boolean)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares the performance of two JavaScript methods: `Object.values` and `filter(Boolean)`. The benchmark is designed to measure which method is faster when applied to an array of objects.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Object.values**: This method returns an array of a given object's own enumerable property values.
2. **filter(Boolean)**: This method creates a new array with all elements that pass the test implemented by the provided function.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **Object.values**:
    *   Pros: Simple, straightforward, and easy to understand.
    *   Cons: May be slower than `filter(Boolean)` for large arrays due to the overhead of creating an object for each element.
*   **filter(Boolean)**:
    *   Pros: More efficient for large arrays since it only checks if a value is truthy or falsy, which can reduce the number of iterations. However, it may be less intuitive and more error-prone than `Object.values`.
    *   Cons: May have additional overhead due to function calls and array indexing.

**Library**

None.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

No special features or syntax are used in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The preparation code generates an array of objects (`entries`) with random properties (`minutes` and `count`). The `reducer` function is then defined to group the entries by their `minutes` values.

**Individual Test Cases**

Two test cases are provided:

1.  **Object.values**: Applies `Object.values` to the reduced array of entries.
2.  **filter(Boolean)**: Applies `filter(Boolean)` to the reduced array of entries.

**Latest Benchmark Result**

The latest benchmark result shows the execution times per second for both test cases on a Chrome 122 browser running on a Mac OS X 10.15.7 device:

*   **filter(Boolean)**: 16891.37890625 executions per second
*   **Object.values**: 16679.705078125 executions per second

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches could be considered for this benchmark, such as:

*   Using `map` and `reduce` instead of `filter(Boolean)`.
*   Using a library like Lodash's `pickBy` to achieve the same result.
*   Using a different method, such as `Array.prototype.forEach`, to group the entries by their `minutes` values.

However, these alternatives would likely change the focus or scope of the benchmark and may not be as straightforward or easy to understand as the original approach.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/122.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 122 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Object.values	16679.7 Ops/sec
filter(Boolean)	16891.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Object.values vs filter(Boolean) (version: 0)

Filtering out undefined values

Comparing performance of: Object.values vs filter(Boolean)

Created: 8 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Object.values

filter(Boolean)

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):