Benchmark: Spread Vs Destructure vs naiive in variable assignment

Script Preparation code:

var input = [1, 2, 3];

Tests:

Spread
const [a, b, c] = input;
Destructure
const {0: a, 1: b, 2: c} = input;
Naiive
const a = input[0]; const b = input[1]; const c = input[2];

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Spread
Destructure
Naiive

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/92.0.4515.159 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 92 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Spread	13798954.0 Ops/sec
Destructure	14688243.0 Ops/sec
Naiive	5097454.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months 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 three ways to assign values to variables in JavaScript:

1. **Spread Syntax**: Using the spread operator (`...`) to expand an array into individual variables.
2. **Destructuring**: Using object destructuring syntax (e.g., `const {a, b, c} = obj;`) to extract values from an object or array into individual variables.
3. **Naiive Assignment**: Manually assigning each value from the input array to a separate variable.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these three approaches:

* Spread Syntax: `const [a, b, c] = input;`
* Destructuring: `const {0: a, 1: b, 2: c} = input;`
* Naiive Assignment: `const a = input[0]; const b = input[1]; const c = input[2];`

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

* **Spread Syntax**: Pros:
	+ Concise and expressive syntax
	+ Easy to read and understand
* Cons:
	+ May have performance overhead due to the spread operator
* **Destructuring**: Pros:
	+ Allows for flexible assignment of values from objects or arrays
	+ Can be more efficient than manual assignment when dealing with large datasets
* Cons:
	+ May require additional knowledge of object destructuring syntax
	+ Can lead to confusing code if not used carefully
* **Naiive Assignment**: Pros:
	+ Easy to understand and maintain
	+ No performance overhead due to the spread operator or destructuring syntax
* Cons:
	+ More verbose than spread syntax or destructuring
	+ May require more lines of code

**Library/ Framework**

There is no explicit library or framework mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript engines (e.g., V8) provide built-in support for object destructuring and spread syntax.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The benchmark uses some special JavaScript features:

* **Spread Operator**: `...` allows arrays to be expanded into individual variables.
* **Object Destructuring**: `{a, b, c}` allows objects or arrays to be destructured into individual variables.

These features are widely supported in modern JavaScript engines and are an essential part of the language.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to performance optimization, here are a few options:

* **Profiling Tools**: Use tools like Chrome DevTools or Node.js Inspector to profile your code and identify performance bottlenecks.
* **Just-In-Time (JIT) Compilation**: Consider using JIT compilers like V8 or SpiderMonkey to optimize performance-critical parts of your code.
* **Parallel Processing**: Explore parallel processing techniques, such as Web Workers or clusters, to speed up computationally intensive tasks.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may require more expertise and resources than the original benchmark, which is specifically designed to compare the performance of three simple assignment approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Spread Vs Destructure vs naiive in variable assignment (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Spread vs Destructure vs Naiive

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Spread

Destructure

Naiive

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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