Benchmark: Map Vs Switch - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<p>Test</p>

Script Preparation code:

function main() {
    console.log('it wont save if I dont put anything here')
}

Tests:

Switch
const input = "10"; switch(input) { case "1": return true; case "2": return true; case "3": return true; case "4": return true; case "5": return true; case "6": return true; case "7": return true; case "8": return true; case "9": return true; case "10": return true; }
Map
const map = new Map([ ["1", true], ["2", true], ["3", true], ["4", true], ["5", true], ["6", true], ["7", true], ["8", true], ["9", true], ["10", true], ]); return map.get("10");
Hashmap
const map = { "1": true, "2": true, "3": true, "4": true, "5": true, "6": true, "7": true, "8": true, "9": true, "10": true, }; return map["10"]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Switch
Map
Hashmap

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark named "Map Vs Switch". It consists of three individual test cases: `Switch`, `Hashmap` (which is actually an object, not a traditional Map), and `Map`. The benchmark definition is represented by a string that defines the code to be executed in each test case.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is a simple JavaScript function named `main` that logs a message to the console. This code is executed before running each test case.

**Html Preparation Code**

The html preparation code consists of an HTML paragraph element `<p>Test</p>` that is rendered along with the test cases.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are three individual test cases:

1. **Switch**
This test case defines a `switch` statement that takes a string input `"10"` and returns `true` for all possible inputs from 1 to 10.
2. **Hashmap (Object)**
This test case creates an object with key-value pairs and retrieves the value associated with the key `"10"`. This is equivalent to using a traditional Map in JavaScript.
3. **Map**
This test case creates a new Map instance, adds key-value pairs to it, and retrieves the value associated with the key `"10"`.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of three different approaches:

1. `Switch`: A traditional `switch` statement.
2. `Hashmap (Object)`: An object-based approach that uses bracket notation to access values.
3. `Map`: A traditional Map instance.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief analysis of each approach:

1. **Switch**: Pros:
	* Simple and concise code
	* Fast lookup times due to the nature of the `switch` statement
Cons:
	* Limited in terms of scalability and flexibility
2. **Hashmap (Object)**: Pros:
	* Easy to implement and understand
	* Works well for small datasets
Cons:
	* Not as performant as traditional Maps, especially for large datasets
3. **Map**: Pros:
	* Fast lookup times due to the nature of the Map data structure
	* Scalable and flexible
Cons:
	* Requires explicit key-value pair management

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these approaches, consider the following:

* If you need a simple, concise solution for small datasets, `Switch` might be sufficient.
* For larger datasets or performance-critical applications, `Map` is likely a better choice.
* When working with objects, `Hashmap (Object)` can be a convenient alternative to traditional Maps.

**Special JS Feature**

The test cases use bracket notation (`map[10]`) and object literal syntax (`{ "1": true }`). These are standard JavaScript features that have been around since the language's inception.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/83.0.4103.61 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 83 on Mac OS X 10.15.3

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Switch	773307584.0 Ops/sec
Map	967139.2 Ops/sec
Hashmap	64021440.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Map Vs Switch (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: Switch vs Map vs Hashmap

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Switch

Map

Hashmap

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):