Benchmark: unique-props - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

function getUniqueProps0(objA = {}, objB = {}) {
  const diff = {};
  for (const key in objB) {
    if (!(key in objA)) {
      diff[key] = objB[key]
    }
  }

  return diff;
}

function getUniqueProps1(objA = {}, objB = {}) {
  return Object.keys(objB).reduce((diff, key) => {
    if (!(key in objA)) {
      diff[key] = objB[key];
    }

    return diff;
  }, {});
}

function getUniqueProps2(objA = {}, objB = {}) {
  const keySet = new Set(Object.keys(objA));

  return Object.keys(objB).reduce((diff, key) => {
    if (!keySet.has(key)) {
      diff[key] = objB[key];
    }

    return diff;
  }, {});
}

function getUniqueProps3(objA = {}, objB = {}) {
  const keySet = new Set(Object.keys(objA));

  const diff = {};

  for (const key in objB) {
    if (!keySet.has(key)) {
      diff[key] = objB[key];
    }
  }

  return diff;
}

Tests:

unique - for...in
const metaProps = { 'a': 1, 'b': 1, 'c': 1 }; const props = { 'b': 1, 'c': 1, 'd': 1 }; getUniqueProps0(metaProps, props);
unique - keys.reduce
const metaProps = { 'a': 1, 'b': 1, 'c': 1 }; const props = { 'b': 1, 'c': 1, 'd': 1 }; getUniqueProps1(metaProps, props);
unique - set + reduce
const metaProps = { 'a': 1, 'b': 1, 'c': 1 }; const props = { 'b': 1, 'c': 1, 'd': 1 }; getUniqueProps2(metaProps, props);
unique - set + for...in
const metaProps = { 'a': 1, 'b': 1, 'c': 1 }; const props = { 'b': 1, 'c': 1, 'd': 1 }; getUniqueProps3(metaProps, props);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
unique - for...in
unique - keys.reduce
unique - set + reduce
unique - set + for...in

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_6) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/13.0.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 13 on Mac OS X 10.14.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
unique - for...in	2976552.5 Ops/sec
unique - keys.reduce	1398017.0 Ops/sec
unique - set + reduce	378801.2 Ops/sec
unique - set + for...in	493278.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of four different approaches to find unique properties between two objects, `objA` and `objB`. The benchmark uses JavaScript functions: `getUniqueProps0`, `getUniqueProps1`, `getUniqueProps2`, and `getUniqueProps3`.

**Approaches Compared**

Here's a brief description of each approach:

1. **`getUniqueProps0`**: This function iterates over the keys of `objB` and checks if the key is present in `objA`. If not, it adds the key-value pair to an object `diff`.
2. **`getUniqueProps1`**: This function uses the `Object.keys()` method to get an array of keys from `objB`, and then uses the `reduce()` method to iterate over the array and add unique key-value pairs to an object `diff`.
3. **`getUniqueProps2`**: This function creates a Set of keys from `objA` using `Set(Object.keys(objA))`. Then, it iterates over the keys of `objB` using `Object.keys()` and checks if each key is present in the Set. If not, it adds the key-value pair to an object `diff`.
4. **`getUniqueProps3`**: This function creates a Set of keys from `objA` using `Set(Object.keys(objA))`. Then, it iterates over the keys of `objB` using a traditional `for...in` loop and checks if each key is present in the Set. If not, it adds the key-value pair to an object `diff`.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

* **`getUniqueProps0`**:
	+ Pros: Simple and easy to understand.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the iterative approach.
* **`getUniqueProps1`**:
	+ Pros: Uses `reduce()`, which can be faster than a traditional loop.
	+ Cons: Requires understanding of the `reduce()` method, which may make it less accessible to beginners.
* **`getUniqueProps2`**:
	+ Pros: Uses a Set, which can provide efficient lookups.
	+ Cons: May require more memory due to the Set creation.
* **`getUniqueProps3`**:
	+ Pros: Uses a traditional `for...in` loop, which may be familiar to some developers.
	+ Cons: May be slower than the other approaches due to the iterative approach.

**Library/Functionality Used**

None of the functions used in this benchmark rely on external libraries or advanced JavaScript features. They are all standard JavaScript methods and functions.

**Special JS Features**

While not using any external libraries, these functions do utilize some advanced JavaScript concepts, such as:

* `Set` objects (in `getUniqueProps2`)
* The `Object.keys()` method (used in all four approaches)
* The `reduce()` method (used in `getUniqueProps1`)
* Traditional `for...in` loops (used in `getUniqueProps3`)

**Benchmark Performance**

The benchmark shows the performance of each approach, with Safari 13 running on a Mac OS X 10.14.6 machine. The results indicate that:

* `getUniqueProps0` is the slowest
* `getUniqueProps1` and `getUniqueProps2` are comparable in terms of speed
* `getUniqueProps3` is the fastest

Overall, this benchmark provides a useful comparison of different approaches to finding unique properties between two objects in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

unique-props (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: unique - for...in vs unique - keys.reduce vs unique - set + reduce vs unique - set + for...in

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

unique - for...in

unique - keys.reduce

unique - set + reduce

unique - set + for...in

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):