var map = new Map();
var arr = [];
var obj = {};
var randomU32 = function() {
return Math.random() * (1 << 31) >>> 0;
}
map.has(randomU32(), true);
randomU32() in arr
randomU32() in obj
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Map | |
Array | |
Object |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Map | 1045960.1 Ops/sec |
Array | 496363.6 Ops/sec |
Object | 513230.7 Ops/sec |
Benchmark Explanation
The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case on MeasureThat.net, which compares the performance of three data structures: Map
, Array
, and Object
with a specific type of key (uint32
). The benchmark aims to measure how fast these data structures can look up keys.
Options Compared
Map
is used to store integer values as keys and arbitrary values as values.Array
is used to store a collection of integer values.Map
, in this case, the Object
is used to store integer values as keys and arbitrary values as values.Pros and Cons
Cons:
Map
.Map
or Object
for large datasets.Library and Purpose
There is no specific library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's essential to note that using the >>> 0
operator on an integer value (Math.random() * (1 << 31)
), which returns a uint32. This optimization helps reduce memory usage and improves performance for integer lookups.
Special JS Feature or Syntax
There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark definition. The code only uses standard JavaScript constructs like Map
, Array
, and Object
, along with basic arithmetic operations.
Other Alternatives
If you're interested in exploring alternative data structures, consider the following:
Map
that allows storing weak references to objects.Note that each data structure has its strengths and weaknesses, and choosing the right one depends on your specific use case.