const firstObject = { sampleData: 'Hello world' }
const secondObject = { moreData: 'foo bar' }
const finalObject = {
firstObject,
secondObject
};
const firstObject = { sampleData: 'Hello world' }
const secondObject = { moreData: 'foo bar' }
const finalObject = Object.assign({}, firstObject, secondObject);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Using the spread operator | |
Using Object.assign |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Using the spread operator | 9535205.0 Ops/sec |
Using Object.assign | 3669071.0 Ops/sec |
Benchmark Overview
The provided benchmark, hosted on MeasureThat.net, compares the performance of two approaches to merge objects in JavaScript: using the spread operator (...
) and Object.assign()
. The benchmark aims to determine which method is faster and more efficient.
Test Cases
There are two test cases:
firstObject
and secondObject
, and then merges them into a single object using the spread operator (...
). The resulting object is assigned to finalObject
.Object.assign()
method to merge the two objects.Options Compared
The two options being compared are:
...
)Object.assign()
Pros and Cons of Each Approach
...
):Library/Functionality Used
The benchmark uses Object.assign()
from the built-in JavaScript Object prototype. No external libraries are required.
Special JS Feature/Syntax
Neither of the test cases uses any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond ES6's spread operator (...
) or Object.assign()
. If you're familiar with these concepts, you're already up to speed!
Other Alternatives
If you'd like to explore alternative approaches to merging objects in JavaScript, consider:
merge()
function from the Lodash libraryObject.create()
methodKeep in mind that these alternatives may not offer significant performance improvements over the spread operator or Object.assign()
, but they can provide more control and flexibility in specific use cases.