var set = new Set();
var object = {};
var array = new Array(5000).fill().map((_, i) => i);
for (let i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
object[i] = true;
}
for (let i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
set.add(i);
}
object[40]
set.has(40)
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Object | |
Set |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Object | 1166710016.0 Ops/sec |
Set | 1161168000.0 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and analyzed.
What is being tested:
The benchmark compares two approaches for looking up elements in different data structures:
object[40]
) on a large object.has()
method (set.has(40)
) on a large set.Options compared:
The two options being compared are:
object[40]
): This approach uses the bracket notation to access an element at a specific index in the object.set.has(40)
): This approach uses the has()
method to check if an element is present in the set.Pros and Cons of each approach:
Library and its purpose:
The Set
library is used to create and manipulate sets. A set is an unordered collection of unique values that can be added, removed, or checked for membership.
In this benchmark, the Set
library is used to create a large set with 5000 elements, which are then checked using the has()
method.
Special JS feature or syntax:
None mentioned in the provided code. However, it's worth noting that modern JavaScript engines often use various optimizations and caching mechanisms under the hood, such as array indexing cacheing, to improve performance for common operations like bracket notation access.
Other alternatives:
Other data structures that could be used for this benchmark include:
has()
method would be more efficient than using bracket notation.These alternative approaches would require adjustments to the script preparation code and might not offer significant performance differences for small datasets. However, they could provide insight into the trade-offs between different data structures and access patterns.