Benchmark: recreate array vs set 2

Script Preparation code:

var test=[];
for(let i=0; i<2000;i++){
    test[i] = i;
}

Tests:

set
const set = new Set(test);
array
const arr = new Array(test);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
set
array

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark test case and explain what's being tested.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is:
```javascript
var test = [];
for (let i = 0; i < 2000; i++) {
    test[i] = i;
}
```
This code creates an array `test` with 2000 elements, each initialized to its index value (`i`). This array will be used as input for both tests.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition consists of two individual test cases:

1. **Set**: `"const set = new Set(test);"`
2. **Array**: `"const arr = new Array(test);"`

Both tests create a data structure from the prepared `test` array: one uses an instance of the built-in `Set` object, while the other uses an instance of the built-in `Array` object.

**What's being tested?**

The benchmark is testing the performance difference between creating an array and creating a set using JavaScript. Specifically:

* How many executions per second can each data structure handle?
* Which data structure has better performance in terms of execution speed?

**Options compared:**

There are two main options compared:

1. **Set**: Using the built-in `Set` object to create a set from the array.
2. **Array**: Using the built-in `Array` constructor to create an instance of an array from the prepared array.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Set**:
	+ Pros:
		- Removes duplicates by default, which might be beneficial for certain use cases (e.g., avoiding duplicate keys in an object).
		- Has better performance when working with unique values.
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower than using `Array` due to the overhead of maintaining a set data structure.
* **Array**:
	+ Pros:
		- Typically faster and more efficient than using `Set`, especially for large datasets.
		- Allows direct indexing, slicing, and manipulation like an array.
	+ Cons:
		- May not remove duplicates by default.

**Library usage**

Neither test uses a third-party library. The built-in JavaScript objects (`Set` and `Array`) are used directly in the benchmark.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. It's a simple, straightforward test of performance between two common data structures.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to add more variations to this benchmark, you could consider testing:

* Using other data structure libraries (e.g., `Map`, `WeakSet`) instead of the built-in `Set` and `Array`.
* Using custom implementation functions for creating sets and arrays from scratch.
* Adding additional inputs or edge cases (e.g., empty arrays, arrays with non-numeric values).

Keep in mind that introducing more variations can make the benchmark more complex and harder to interpret.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/110.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 110 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
set	10149.6 Ops/sec
array	13563284.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

recreate array vs set 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: set vs array

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

set

array

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):