var bytes = new Uint8Array([1,2,3,4])
var offset = 0
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++){
const x = new DataView(bytes.buffer, bytes.byteOffset).getUint32(offset)
}
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++){
const x = (
bytes[offset] << 24 |
bytes[offset + 1] << 16 |
bytes[offset + 2] << 8 |
bytes[offset + 3]
)
}
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
DataView | |
Direct |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
DataView | 249.0 Ops/sec |
Direct | 184.1 Ops/sec |
Benchmark Overview
The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between using a DataView
object to access a Uint32Array
versus performing direct bitwise operations on the array.
What is tested?
DataView
object to access and manipulate a Uint32Array
. The test case creates a DataView
instance, sets its offset, and then uses it to get the value of a 32-bit unsigned integer at that offset.Options compared
DataView
vs Direct bitwise operationsPros and Cons of each approach:
DataView
object.DataView
object, especially for large arrays.Library used
Uint8Array
: A typed array representing an array of 8-bit unsigned integers.Special JS feature/syntax
None mentioned in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that JavaScript arrays are typically implemented as contiguous blocks of memory, and using a DataView
object or direct bitwise operations can affect performance depending on the specific implementation and hardware.
Other alternatives
If not using a DataView
, other approaches to access and manipulate array data include:
Buffer
(Node.js) or ByteBuffer
(Java)lodash
or array-iterator
Keep in mind that each approach has its trade-offs, and the choice of method depends on the specific requirements of your application.