Benchmark: Map access with multi type keys.

Script Preparation code:

var mapStringKeys = new Map([["one", true], ["two", true], ["three", true], ["four", true], ["five", true], ["six", true], ["seven", true], ["eight", true], ["nine", true], ["ten", true]]);
var mapStringAndSymbolKeys = new Map([["one", true], [Symbol("two"), true], ["three", true], [Symbol("four"), true], ["five", true], [Symbol("six"), true], ["seven", true], [Symbol("eight"), true], ["nine", true], [Symbol("ten"), true]]);

Tests:

Get from map with only string keys
var value = mapStringKeys.get('eight');
Get from map with mixed string and symbol keys
var value = mapStringAndSymbolKeys.get(Symbol('eight'));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Get from map with only string keys
Get from map with mixed string and symbol keys

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two JavaScript maps: `mapStringKeys` and `mapStringAndSymbolKeys`. These maps are created with different key types: string keys only and mixed string and symbol keys, respectively. The benchmark measures the execution time of retrieving values from these maps using the `.get()` method.

**Benchmark Comparison**

The benchmark compares the performance of two test cases:

1. **Get from map with only string keys**: This test case retrieves a value from `mapStringKeys` using the key `"eight"`.
2. **Get from map with mixed string and symbol keys**: This test case retrieves a value from `mapStringAndSymbolKeys` using the symbol key `Symbol("eight")`.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

1. **Using only string keys (mapStringKeys)**:
	* Pros: Simpler, more familiar, and easier to implement.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient or scalable for large datasets with diverse key types.
2. **Using mixed string and symbol keys (mapStringAndSymbolKeys)**:
	* Pros: Can take advantage of symbol-based lookups, which may provide faster performance, especially when dealing with large datasets or complex key hierarchies.
	* Cons: Requires more advanced understanding of JavaScript symbols and may be less familiar to developers without prior experience.

**JavaScript Library: `Map`**

The `Map` data structure is a built-in JavaScript object that allows you to store mappings of unique keys to values. In this benchmark, we use the `Map` constructor to create instances with different key types.

**Symbol-Based Lookups**

In JavaScript, symbols are a new type of primitive value introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). Symbols provide a way to uniquely identify objects and can be used as keys in data structures like maps. In this benchmark, we use symbol-based lookups to retrieve values from `mapStringAndSymbolKeys`. This approach may offer performance benefits when dealing with large datasets or complex key hierarchies.

**Other Considerations**

* **Device and Browser Variability**: The benchmark results show variability across different devices (Desktop vs. unknown platform) and browsers (Safari 14). This highlights the importance of considering device and browser differences when optimizing JavaScript code.
* **Optimization Techniques**: To further optimize performance in this benchmark, consider using techniques like caching, memoization, or parallelizing map operations.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for benchmarking JavaScript maps include:

1. **Google Benchmark**: A popular benchmarking library for JavaScript and other languages.
2. **Benchmark.js**: Another widely used benchmarking library for JavaScript, offering a simple API for creating benchmarks.
3. **Web Performance**: The official Web Performance documentation provides guidelines and tools for optimizing web performance, including benchmarking JavaScript code.

In conclusion, the provided benchmark JSON allows us to test the performance of JavaScript maps with different key types, highlighting the trade-offs between simplicity and efficiency in map implementation.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/14.1.2 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 14 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Get from map with only string keys	10143329.0 Ops/sec
Get from map with mixed string and symbol keys	1881902.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Map access with multi type keys. (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Get from map with only string keys vs Get from map with mixed string and symbol keys

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Get from map with only string keys

Get from map with mixed string and symbol keys

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):