Benchmark: Bind vs closure declaration without recalc

Script Preparation code:

function toBind(param) {
  return param * 2;
}
function bind() {
  var rnd = Math.random();
  return toBind.bind(null, rnd);
}

function closure() {
  var rnd = Math.random();
  return inner;
  function inner() {
    return rnd * 2;
  }
}

var bound = bind();
var closed = closure();

Tests:

create bind
var fnc = bind();
create closure
var fnc = closure()
use bind
bound();
use closure()
closed();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
create bind
create closure
use bind
use closure()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case created on MeasureThat.net, which aims to compare the performance of two approaches: binding (using `bind()`) and closure declaration without reevaluation (`closure()`).

**Binding vs Closure Declaration**

In JavaScript, binding (`bind()`) is used to create a new function that has its `this` keyword bound to a specific value. This is useful when you want to pass the context of an existing function as an argument.

On the other hand, closure declaration without reevaluation (`closure()`) is a technique where you define a function inside another function and return it. The inner function (or variable) has access to its outer scope's variables, but this feature is not immediately apparent when you first create the closure.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Bind**: Using `bind()` to create a new function that captures the current context.
2. **Closure Declaration without Reevaluation**: Creating a closure by defining a function inside another function and returning it.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

*   **Binding (`bind()`)**
    *   Pros:
        *   Easy to understand and implement
        *   Simple syntax for creating bound functions
    *   Cons:
        *   Creates a new function object every time `bind()` is called, which can lead to unnecessary memory allocations.
        *   Requires explicit context setting when calling the bound function.
*   **Closure Declaration without Reevaluation**
    *   Pros:
        *   Can lead to more efficient memory usage since closures are not created explicitly for each call.
        *   Encourages more modular and reusable code, as functions can be returned as values from other functions.
    *   Cons:
        *   Less intuitive for developers who are not familiar with the technique
        *   Requires careful consideration of the scope and variables being used in closures to avoid unexpected behavior.

**Library or Special JS Feature Used**

None, only standard JavaScript features are used.

**Other Considerations**

When dealing with performance-critical code, it's essential to consider factors such as:

*   Memory allocation and deallocation
*   Execution frequency and branching
*   Context switching

In this benchmark, both approaches have their trade-offs in terms of memory usage and execution efficiency. MeasureThat.net allows users to compare these two approaches in a controlled environment, providing insights into the performance implications of each technique.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring other microbenchmarking platforms or alternatives for your JavaScript performance tests:

*   MeasureThat.net (the platform being used here)
*   jsbench.org
*   perf.js.org
*   jsperf.com

These resources offer a range of tools and features to help you compare the performance of different JavaScript approaches, libraries, or features.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/91.0.4472.114 Safari/537.36 Edg/91.0.864.59

Browser/OS: Chrome 91 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
create bind	4427413.5 Ops/sec
create closure	5577151.0 Ops/sec
use bind	17292338.0 Ops/sec
use closure()	17266328.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Bind vs closure declaration without recalc (version: 0)

removes bind()/closure() calls from tests 3 and 4

Comparing performance of: create bind vs create closure vs use bind vs use closure()

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

create bind

create closure

use bind

use closure()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):