Benchmark: Map vs Object creation 3

Script Preparation code:

var i = 0, count = 1000000, a;

Tests:

Map creation
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { const test = new Map(); }
Obj creation {}
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { const test = {}; }
object.create
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { const test = Object.create(null); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Map creation
Obj creation {}
object.create

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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/15.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 15 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Map creation	7.7 Ops/sec
Obj creation {}	28.9 Ops/sec
object.create	10.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test measures the performance of JavaScript objects in three different ways:

1. Creating an empty object (`{}`)
2. Using the `Map` data structure
3. Creating an object using the `Object.create(null)` method

**Comparison Options**

These three approaches are being compared to determine which one is the most efficient.

* **Empty Object (`{}`)**: Creating an empty object is a common operation in JavaScript.
* **Map**: A Map is a data structure that stores key-value pairs. It's more efficient than an object for certain use cases, like lookup and iteration.
* `Object.create(null)`: This method creates a new object with no prototype chain or any inherent properties.

**Pros/Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Empty Object (`{}`)**:
	* Pros: Simple and widely supported.
	* Cons: May have performance implications due to its nature (e.g., slow property lookup).
2. **Map**:
	* Pros: Efficient for lookups, iteration, and some operations that involve key-value pairs.
	* Cons: Not suitable for all use cases (e.g., when you need a simple object with properties).
3. `Object.create(null)`:
	* Pros: Allows for more control over the object's prototype chain and inherent properties.
	* Cons: Less intuitive and less widely supported than creating an empty object or using a Map.

**Library Used**

None is explicitly mentioned in the provided benchmark definition, but based on the usage, it appears that no external library is being used.

**Special JavaScript Feature/Syntax**

There's no mention of any special JavaScript features or syntax that might be relevant to this benchmark. The code only uses standard JavaScript constructs (e.g., `for` loops, object literals).

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to compare these approaches with other alternatives, some options could include:

* Using a different data structure, like an array or a Set.
* Using a library like Lodash for utility functions that might affect performance.
* Creating objects using other methods, such as `Object.assign()` or a constructor function.

However, the current benchmark focuses on three simple and widely supported approaches, making it easier to understand and compare their relative performances.

Related benchmarks:

Map vs Object creation 3 (version: 0)

Lookup of map vs object

Comparing performance of: Map creation vs Obj creation {} vs object.create

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Map creation

Obj creation {}

object.create

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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