Benchmark: array filter vs object destructure

HTML Preparation code:

..

Tests:

fn arr
const ka = ['id', 'token', 'family', 'grade', 'hex']; const k = 'token'; const fl = function(e) { return e !== k }; const fna = function() { return ka.filter(fl) }; fna();
fn obj
const ko = { id: undefined, token: undefined, family: undefined, grade: undefined, hex: undefined }; const k = 'token'; 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 benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and some pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches for filtering data: using `Array.prototype.filter()` (in JavaScript) versus object destructuring (`const { [k]: _, ...rest } = ko;`).

**Options Compared**

1. **Array.prototype.filter()**
	* Purpose: Remove elements from an array that do not meet a condition.
	* Pros:
		+ Widely supported and implemented in most browsers.
		+ Simple to use and understand.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slow for large arrays due to the need to create a new array.
2. **Object Destructuring**
	* Purpose: Extract specific properties from an object.
	* Pros:
		+ Fast and efficient, as it avoids creating a new array.
		+ Can be more concise and readable in some cases.
3. **Object.keys() and Rest Spread Operator**

**Library Used**

None explicitly mentioned, but `Object.keys()` is a built-in JavaScript method.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The benchmark uses object destructuring (`const { [k]: _, ...rest } = ko;`), which is a feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). This syntax allows for concise and readable way to extract properties from an object.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided `Script Preparation Code` is empty, which means the benchmark uses pre-existing code that's already set up. The `Html Preparation Code` is also empty, indicating that the benchmark doesn't require any specific HTML setup.

**Other Alternatives**

Alternative approaches could include:

1. Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` to filter an array.
2. Creating a custom filtering function using a closure.
3. Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Ramda for functional programming.

However, these alternatives might not be as efficient or concise as the object destructuring approach used in this benchmark.

In summary, the benchmark tests two approaches for filtering data: `Array.prototype.filter()` and object destructuring (`const { [k]: _, ...rest } = ko;`). While both have their pros and cons, object destructuring appears to be the faster and more concise option.

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	6716054.5 Ops/sec
fn obj	580744.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

array filter vs object destructure (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):