Benchmark: Object.fromEntries vs reduce

Script Preparation code:

var data = { ...Array.from(Array(10000).keys()) };

Tests:

Object.fromEntries
Object.fromEntries(Object.entries(data).map((key, value) => [key, value]));
Reduce (reuse object)
Object.entries(data).reduce((acc, [k, v]) => { acc[k] = v.toString(); return acc; }, {});
Reduce (creating temporary objects)
Object.entries(data).reduce((acc, [k, v]) => ({ ...acc, [k]: v.toString() }), {});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Object.fromEntries
Reduce (reuse object)
Reduce (creating temporary objects)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 23 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what is tested, compared, and the pros and cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition consists of three test cases:

1. `Object.fromEntries`: This method creates an object from an array of key-value pairs.
2. `Reduce (reuse object)`: This method uses the reduce() function to create a new object by iterating over the entries of the input data and adding each value as a property to the accumulator object.
3. `Reduce (creating temporary objects)`: Similar to the previous test case, but instead of reusing the accumulator object, it creates a new temporary object for each iteration.

**Options Compared**

The three options are compared in terms of their performance, which is measured by the number of executions per second.

* `Object.fromEntries`: This method is likely to be faster since it avoids the overhead of creating and manipulating intermediate objects.
* `Reduce (reuse object)`: This approach can lead to slower performance due to the reuse of the accumulator object, which may involve more memory allocations and garbage collection.
* `Reduce (creating temporary objects)`: This option creates a new temporary object for each iteration, which can be slower than reusing an existing object.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

* `Object.fromEntries`:
	+ Pros: likely to be faster due to reduced overhead.
	+ Cons: may not handle edge cases as well as other methods.
* `Reduce (reuse object)`: 
	+ Pros: may provide better performance for certain use cases, e.g., when memory is limited.
	+ Cons: can lead to slower performance and increased memory usage.
* `Reduce (creating temporary objects)`:
	+ Pros: avoids potential issues with reusing accumulator objects.
	+ Cons: likely to be slower due to the creation of intermediate objects.

**Library Usage**

None of the test cases explicitly use a library. However, it's worth noting that the `Array.from()` method is used in one of the benchmark definitions, which is a built-in JavaScript method.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no specific special JS features or syntax mentioned in the provided data.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 21 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:132.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/132.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 132 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Object.fromEntries	278.9 Ops/sec
Reduce (reuse object)	1861.3 Ops/sec
Reduce (creating temporary objects)	0.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Object.fromEntries vs reduce (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Object.fromEntries vs Reduce (reuse object) vs Reduce (creating temporary objects)

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Object.fromEntries

Reduce (reuse object)

Reduce (creating temporary objects)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 23 days ago):