arrowFn = () => this;
closureFn =
(function() {
var self = this;
return function() {
return self;
}
})();
arrowFn()
closureFn()
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Arrow function | |
Closure function |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Arrow function | 7085303.5 Ops/sec |
Closure function | 6719939.0 Ops/sec |
I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its results.
Benchmark Overview
The provided benchmark compares two approaches: Arrow Functions and Closure Functions in JavaScript. The goal is to determine which approach is more efficient.
Script Preparation Code
The Script Preparation Code defines the two functions being compared:
arrowFn
: An arrow function that returns this
.closureFn
: A closure function created using an immediately invoked function expression (IIFE) that returns another function, also returning self
.Options Compared
The benchmark is comparing two options:
Pros and Cons of Each Approach
this
outside the function body, and may not work with some older browsers.Library Usage
There is no explicit library usage mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, some libraries like Lodash or Underscore.js might be used for similar tasks, but that's not relevant to this specific benchmark.
Special JS Features/Syntax
There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definition. Both arrow functions and closure functions use standard JavaScript features.
Other Alternatives
Some alternative approaches to comparing these two options could include:
Function
constructors instead of arrow functionsself
variablefor
, while
) or iterative methodsHowever, these alternatives are not mentioned in the benchmark definition.
Benchmark Results
The latest benchmark results show that:
This suggests that arrow functions are currently faster than closure functions on this specific test case and browser configuration.