Benchmark: ES5 setter vs func

Script Preparation code:

var SomeThing = (function () {
    function SomeThing() {
        this._value = 1;
    }
    Object.defineProperty(SomeThing.prototype, "value", {
        get: function () { return this._value; },
        set: function (v) { this._value = v; },
        enumerable: false,
        configurable: true
    });
    SomeThing.prototype.setValue = function (v) {
        this._value = v;
    };
    return SomeThing;
}()),
st = new SomeThing();

Tests:

setter
st.value = 2;
func
st.setValue(2);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
setter
func

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 23 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches to setting a value on an object in JavaScript:

1. Using a property setter (set) with `Object.defineProperty()`.
2. Creating a custom function (`setValue`) to set the value.

**Script Preparation Code:**
```javascript
var SomeThing = (function () {
  function SomeThing() {
    this._value = 1;
  }
  Object.defineProperty(SomeThing.prototype, "value", {
    get: function () { return this._value; },
    set: function (v) { this._value = v; },
    enumerable: false,
    configurable: true
  });
  SomeThing.prototype.setValue = function (v) { this._value = v; };
  return SomeThing;
}()),
st = new SomeThing();
```
This code creates a class `SomeThing` with a private property `_value`. The `Object.defineProperty()` method is used to create a getter and setter for the "value" property. Additionally, a custom function `setValue` is defined on the prototype of `SomeThing`.

**Html Preparation Code:**
```javascript
null
```
This field is empty, suggesting that no HTML-specific code is required for this benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases:**

There are two test cases:

1. `setter`: Sets the value to 2 using the setter.
```javascript
st.value = 2;
```
2. `func`: Calls the custom function `setValue` with the value 2.
```javascript
st.setValue(2);
```
**What's Being Tested:**

The benchmark is testing which approach is faster:

* Using a property setter (`setter`)
* Creating a custom function to set the value (`func`)

**Comparison Options and Pros/Cons:**

1. **Property Setter (setter)**:
	* Pros: Native JavaScript functionality, likely optimized by browsers.
	* Cons: May involve additional overhead due to the getter and setter functions.
2. **Custom Function (func)**:
	* Pros: Can be optimized for performance by using inline assembly or other techniques.
	* Cons: Requires explicit function creation and call, may not be optimized by browsers.

**Library Used:**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, `Object.defineProperty()` is a part of the ECMAScript standard, which means it's built-in to JavaScript engines.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax:**

The benchmark uses a feature called "property descriptors" (`Object.defineProperty()`) and a technique called "prototype chaining" (by defining a function on the prototype). These features are well-documented in the ECMAScript specification and are widely supported by modern browsers.

**Alternatives:**

If you want to create similar benchmarks, you can use other methods to set values on objects, such as:

* Using `this.value = 2;` (without defining a getter or setter)
* Creating a wrapper function around a built-in function, like `Array.prototype.push()`
* Using a different library or framework that provides optimized performance primitives.

Keep in mind that the specific approach and language used can significantly impact performance.

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/95.0.4638.69 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 95 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
setter	11082120.0 Ops/sec
func	11052200.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

ES5 setter vs func (version: 0)

desc

Comparing performance of: setter vs func

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

setter

func

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 23 days ago):