Benchmark: fastest way to identify node

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="root"></div>

Script Preparation code:

mp={}
pr=[]

for (let i = 0; i < 50; ++i) {
  const dv = document.createElement("div");
  dv.id = 'iv'+i
  mp[dv] = i
  root.appendChild(dv)
  pr.push([dv,i])
}

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * max);
}

Tests:

loop map
console.log(mp[root.children[getRandomInt(50)]])
loop id
console.log(root.children[getRandomInt(50)].id.substr(1))
linear loop
for (let i = 0; i < 50; ++i) { let f = root.children[getRandomInt(50)] if (f == pr[i][0]) { break } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
loop map
loop id
linear loop

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 provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, library usage, special JS features or syntax, and alternatives.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Script Preparation Code` is used to create a benchmarking scenario for testing. It creates an HTML page with a `<div>` element named "root" and appends 50 child elements to it using the `document.createElement` method. Each child element has a unique ID assigned to it, which will be used later in the benchmark.

The `Html Preparation Code` is used to generate the basic HTML structure for the benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. **"loop map"`**: This test case checks the performance of iterating over an array using the `map()` method.
	* The benchmark definition uses `console.log(mp[root.children[getRandomInt(50)]]);`, which tries to access the value at a random index in the `mp` object, which is a child element of the "root" div.
2. **"loop id"`**: This test case checks the performance of accessing an array using indexing.
	* The benchmark definition uses `console.log(root.children[getRandomInt(50)].id.substr(1));`, which tries to access the second character (index 1) of a random element's ID in the "root" div.
3. **"linear loop"`**: This test case checks the performance of iterating over an array using a traditional `for` loop.
	* The benchmark definition uses `for (let i = 0; i < 50; ++i) {\r\n  let f = root.children[getRandomInt(50)]\r\n  if (f == pr[i][0]) {\r\n      break\r\n  }\r\n}`, which tries to find a matching element in the array.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares three options for iterating over an array:

1. **`map()` method**: This is a modern, concise way of creating new arrays by performing an operation on every element.
2. **Indexing**: This involves accessing elements directly using their index (in this case, `root.children[getRandomInt(50)]`).
3. **Traditional `for` loop**: This is a more verbose approach to iterating over an array.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **`map()` method**:
	* Pros: concise, expressive, and efficient.
	* Cons: may have performance overhead due to the creation of a new array, and can be less intuitive for some developers.
2. **Indexing**:
	* Pros: straightforward, easy to understand, and fast access times.
	* Cons: requires manual indexing, which can lead to off-by-one errors or incorrect indexing.
3. **Traditional `for` loop**:
	* Pros: familiar, easy to understand, and no performance overhead for iterating over the array itself.
	* Cons: verbose, may have performance overhead due to unnecessary work (e.g., accessing every element in the array).

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in this benchmark. However, it does utilize modern JavaScript features such as `map()`.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided code.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for iterating over arrays include:

1. **`forEach()` method**: Similar to `map()`, but without creating a new array.
2. **Arrow functions**: Can be used with `map()` to create concise and expressive code.
3. **Spread operators**: Can be used with `for...of` loops to iterate over arrays.

Note that the specific choice of iteration method depends on the use case, personal preference, and performance requirements.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/118.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 118 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
loop map	281146.3 Ops/sec
loop id	324131.2 Ops/sec
linear loop	59071.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

fastest way to identify node (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: loop map vs loop id vs linear loop

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

loop map

loop id

linear loop

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):