data = [Array(100)].map((_, id) => ({ id, data: Math.random() }))
const res = new Map(data.map(v => [v.id, v])).get(50)
const res = data.find(({ id }) => id === 50)
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Array to Map and find | |
Array.find |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Array to Map and find | 315864.8 Ops/sec |
Array.find | 22095840.0 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.
Benchmark Definition:
MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark in question tests two approaches for finding an element in an array:
get()
method to retrieve a specific value from the map.Options Compared:
The two approaches being compared are:
Array to Map
)Array.find()
methodPros and Cons of Each Approach:
Pros:
Cons:
Pros:
Cons:
Library and Purpose:
There are no external libraries used in this benchmark. The Array
class and its methods (such as map()
and find()
) are built-in JavaScript classes.
Special JS Feature or Syntax:
There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. It only relies on standard JavaScript concepts and built-ins.
Other Alternatives:
If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few examples:
Array.find()
for repeated executions, to reduce overhead.Array.toMap()
and Array.find()
concurrently.Keep in mind that these alternatives may not necessarily lead to significant improvements, especially for small input sizes. However, they can provide interesting variations on the original benchmark and insights into the performance trade-offs involved.