Benchmark: Object and no-object speed

Tests:

no-object
class Person { constructor(name, age) { this.name = name, this.age = age } } const ivan = new Person('Ivan', 37)
object
class Person { constructor(settings) { this.name = settings.name, this.age = settings.age } } const ivan = new Person({ name: "Ivan", age: 37 })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
no-object
object

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/89.0.4389.90 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 89 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
no-object	428937.8 Ops/sec
object	396488.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two test cases for measuring the performance of JavaScript objects in class constructors. The tests compare the execution speed of creating instances with and without an object literal.

**Options compared:**

1. **No-object**: Creating an instance using the `new` keyword, where no object literal is used.
```javascript
const ivan = new Person('Ivan', 37);
```
2. **Object**: Creating an instance using the `new` keyword with an object literal.
```javascript
const ivan = new Person({ name: "Ivan", age: 37 });
```
**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **No-object**:
	* Pros: May be faster due to less overhead, as no object creation is involved.
	* Cons: May require more explicit parameter handling, potentially leading to errors if not done correctly.
2. **Object**:
	* Pros: Easier to read and maintain, as the object literal provides a clear structure for the constructor parameters.
	* Cons: May be slower due to additional overhead from creating an object.

**Other considerations:**

1. Library usage: The `Person` class uses a standard JavaScript syntax for constructors, which is widely supported across browsers and engines.
2. Special JS feature/syntax: None mentioned in the provided code snippets. No special features or syntax are being used that would affect the benchmarking results.
3. Alternatives:
	* Other approaches could include using ES6 classes with destructuring, or using a different constructor syntax altogether (e.g., using `function Person` instead of `class Person`).
	* Additionally, other factors like memory allocation, garbage collection, and caching might also impact performance.

**Library usage:**

The `Person` class uses the standard JavaScript class syntax, which is part of the ECMAScript 2015 specification. This syntax has been widely adopted across modern browsers and engines, making it a suitable choice for benchmarking purposes.

**Special JS feature/syntax:**

None mentioned in the provided code snippets.

Related benchmarks:

Object and no-object speed (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: no-object vs object

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

no-object

object

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):