Benchmark: object destruction vs. dot notation 2

Script Preparation code:

var object = {a: {b: {c: {d: 99}}}}

Tests:

object destruction
var { a: { b: { c: { d } } } } = object
dot notation
var d = object.a.b.c.d

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
object destruction
dot notation

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches for accessing nested object properties in JavaScript:

1. Object destruction (also known as "destructuring" or "object destructuring")
2. Dot notation

**Script Preparation Code:**
The script starts by defining an object `object` with a nested structure:
```javascript
var object = {a: {b: {c: {d: 99}}}}
```
This object has four levels of nesting, making it a suitable test case for comparing performance differences between the two approaches.

**Html Preparation Code:**
There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that this benchmark does not depend on any HTML-related tasks or rendering.

**Test Cases:**

### Object Destruction Test Case

The first test case uses object destruction to access the nested property `d`:
```javascript
var { a: { b: { c: { d } } } } = object
```
In this code, an object destructuring pattern is used to extract the value of `d` from the `object`. This approach allows for more concise and readable code.

### Dot Notation Test Case

The second test case uses dot notation to access the nested property `d`:
```javascript
var d = object.a.b.c.d
```
In this code, a series of consecutive properties are accessed using the dot notation (e.g., `object.a.b.c.d`). This approach can be more verbose and less readable than object destruction.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Object Destruction:**
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and readable code
		- Can reduce memory allocation overhead, as only a single variable is created
	+ Cons:
		- May require additional browser support (some older browsers may not support this syntax)
		- Can be slower due to the creation of a new object
* **Dot Notation:**
	+ Pros:
		- Widely supported across most modern browsers and JavaScript engines
		- Does not require special syntax or semantically changes the code structure
	+ Cons:
		- More verbose and less readable code
		- May lead to increased memory allocation overhead, as multiple variables are created

**Library Usage:**
In this benchmark, there is no explicit library usage. However, some JavaScript engines (e.g., SpiderMonkey) may provide built-in optimizations or features that could affect the performance results.

**Special JS Features/Syntax:**
There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these test cases. The code is written using standard JavaScript syntax.

**Alternative Approaches:**
Other approaches to accessing nested object properties could include:

1. Using a loop to iterate through the properties
2. Utilizing a recursive function to access nested properties
3. Employing a different data structure, such as an array of objects

These alternative approaches may have their own set of pros and cons, depending on the specific use case and performance requirements.

**Other Considerations:**

* The benchmark measures the number of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond) for each test case.
* The results are reported for both browsers and devices to provide insights into platform-specific performance differences.
* By comparing the performance of two different approaches, this benchmark aims to help developers choose the most efficient way to access nested object properties in their code.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 116 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
object destruction	35875050.0 Ops/sec
dot notation	35804180.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

object destruction vs. dot notation 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: object destruction vs dot notation

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

object destruction

dot notation

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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