Benchmark: Lazy test vs call

Script Preparation code:

function mkLazyTest(fn) {
  var thunk = fn, ran = false, value = null;
  return function() {
    if (!ran) {
      value = thunk();
      ran = true;
    }
    return value;
  };
}

function mkLazyCall(fn) {
  var thunk = fn;
  var get = function() {
    var value = thunk();
    get = function() { return value; };
    return value;
  };
  return function() { return get(); };
}

function cfn(v) { 
  return function() { return v; }
}

var fn = cfn(1);
var lz1 = mkLazyTest(fn);
var lz2 = mkLazyCall(fn);
var i = 0, iterations = 1000;

Tests:

Lazy with existence test
for (i = 0; i < iterations ; i++) { lz1(); }
Lazy with fetch call
for (i = 0; i < iterations ; i++) { lz2(); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lazy with existence test
Lazy with fetch call

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

ⓘ Get performance results from real users on your website with Request Metrics.

Website Performance Monitoring by Request Metrics

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:92.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/92.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 92 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lazy with existence test	38811.3 Ops/sec
Lazy with fetch call	38988.2 Ops/sec

Lazy test vs call (version: 0)

Tests if a lazy implementation that uses a test vs one that replaces the thunk function is more efficient

Comparing performance of: Lazy with existence test vs Lazy with fetch call

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lazy with existence test

Lazy with fetch call

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A