Benchmark: test array filter vs object destructure deux

HTML Preparation code:

..

Script Preparation code:

    var ka = ['id', 'token', 'family', 'grade', 'hex'];
    var ko = {
      id: undefined,
      token: undefined,
      family: undefined,
      grade: undefined,
      hex: undefined
    };

    var k = 'token';

Tests:

fn arr
const fl = function(e) { return e !== k }; const fna = function() { return ka.filter(fl) }; fna();
fn obj
const fno = function() { const {[k]: _, ...rest} = ko; return Object.keys(rest); }; fno();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
fn arr
fn obj

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing two different approaches to filter an array and extract properties from an object:

1. `Array.prototype.filter()`: This method creates a new array with all elements that pass the test implemented by the provided function.
2. Object destructuring assignment (`const {[k]: _, ...rest} = ko;`)

**Options being compared**

The benchmark is comparing two options:

* `fn arr` (array filter)
* `fn obj` (object destructuring)

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

1. **Array.prototype.filter()**
	* Pros:
		+ Widely supported and efficient for large datasets.
		+ Allows for a flexible filtering condition using a callback function.
	* Cons:
		+ Creates a new array, which can be memory-intensive for large datasets.
		+ May have performance overhead due to the creation of the new array.
2. **Object destructuring assignment**
	* Pros:
		+ Efficient and fast, as it only accesses existing properties.
		+ Does not create a new object or array.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires that the property is already defined in the object (in this case, `k`).
		+ May not be suitable for more complex filtering conditions.

**Library usage**

In both test cases, the `ka` and `ko` variables are used to represent an array and an object, respectively. The `k` variable represents a property that is being filtered or destructured. There doesn't appear to be any external library dependencies in these test cases.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

There doesn't seem to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. Both approaches are using standard language features.

**Other alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches, some options could include:

* Using `Array.prototype.forEach()` instead of `filter()`
* Using a library like Lodash (`_.filter()`) or Ramda (`R.filter()`)
* Using a different data structure, such as a Map or a Set
* Implementing a custom filtering algorithm

Keep in mind that the specific use case and requirements may affect the choice of approach.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/113.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 113 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
fn arr	1005017.4 Ops/sec
fn obj	1442963.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test array filter vs object destructure deux (version: 0)

test array filter vs object destructure

Comparing performance of: fn arr vs fn obj

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

fn arr

fn obj

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):