var o1 = { a: 1 };
var o2 = { b: 2 }
var o3 = Object.assign({}, o1, o2);
var o3 = {o1, o2}
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Object.assign | |
Spread |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Object.assign | 2891217.2 Ops/sec |
Spread | 1602998.9 Ops/sec |
I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons.
Benchmark Overview
The benchmark compares two approaches to merge objects in JavaScript: Object.assign()
and the spread operator (...
). The test cases use sample object literals o1
and o2
, which are defined in the "Script Preparation Code" section of the benchmark definition.
What's being tested?
In each test case, a new object o3
is created by merging o1
and o2
. The difference lies in the method used to merge these objects:
Object.assign()
), an explicit call to Object.assign(o3, o1, o2)
is made.o3 = {...o1, ...o2}
is used.Comparison and pros/cons
Here's a brief comparison of these two approaches:
Pros:
Object.assign()
method, which can be useful for developers familiar with it.Cons:
Pros:
Cons:
Library usage
There is no library explicitly mentioned in these test cases. The Object.assign()
method is a built-in JavaScript function, and the spread operator is also a native JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2018 (ES2018).
Special JS feature or syntax
The benchmark uses the spread operator (...
), which was introduced in ES2018. This feature allows for more concise object merging.
Alternatives
Other alternatives for merging objects include:
reduce()
on an array of key-value pairs. While this can be useful in certain situations, it's less common for simple object merging.Keep in mind that benchmarking JavaScript performance should consider factors like device platform, operating system, and browser version to ensure accurate results. MeasureThat.net is a great resource for such benchmarks!