Benchmark: Arrow function vs normal function comparison

Script Preparation code:

arrowFn = (a, b) => a + b;
fn = function(a, b) {
    return a + b;
};

Tests:

Arrow function
arrowFn()
Normal function
fn()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Arrow function
Normal function

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two types of functions in JavaScript: arrow functions and regular (non-arrow) functions.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Arrow function**: An arrow function is a concise way to define small, single-purpose functions. It uses the `=>` operator to separate the input parameters from the function body.
2. **Regular function**: A regular function is defined using the `function` keyword and has more verbose syntax.

**Pros and Cons**

**Arrow Function:**

Pros:

* Concise syntax
* Less boilerplate code
* Can be used as method implementations in objects

Cons:

* Limited control over function scope (e.g., no `this` binding)
* Not compatible with older JavaScript engines that don't support arrow functions

**Regular Function:**

Pros:

* More traditional syntax, making it easier to read and understand for some developers
* More control over function scope and behavior
* Compatible with all JavaScript engines

Cons:

* Verbose syntax can make code harder to write and maintain

**Library and Purpose**

In this benchmark, the `function` keyword is used as a library. The `function` keyword provides a way to define custom functions in JavaScript.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

This benchmark doesn't use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the comparison of arrow functions and regular functions. However, it's worth noting that other benchmarks might compare different JavaScript engines, optimizations, or feature implementations.

**Other Alternatives**

There are several alternatives to this benchmark:

* **Babel**: A transpiler that converts modern JavaScript code into older syntax for compatibility with older browsers.
* **ES6+ Syntax Testing**: Benchmarks that test the performance of ES6+ ( ECMAScript 2015+) features, such as async/await, let/catch, or class expressions.
* **Browser-specific benchmarks**: Benchmarks that focus on specific browser features or optimizations, such as WebAssembly, WebGL, or GPU-accelerated computations.

I hope this explanation helps software engineers understand the purpose and implications of this benchmark!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 17 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/18.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 18 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Arrow function	15488297.0 Ops/sec
Normal function	15412181.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Arrow function vs normal function comparison (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Arrow function vs Normal function

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Arrow function

Normal function

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):