const obj = {
a:1,
b:1,
c:1,
d:1,
e:1,
f:1,
g:1,
h:1,
i:1,
}
const {a, d, i} = obj;
const n = {a, d, i};
const obj = {
a:1,
b:1,
c:1,
d:1,
e:1,
f:1,
g:1,
h:1,
i:1,
}
const n = {a: obj.a, d: obj.d, i: obj.i};
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Object destructuring | |
Property picking |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Object destructuring | 230114640.0 Ops/sec |
Property picking | 204251888.0 Ops/sec |
I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations.
Benchmark Definition
The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for creating a partial object:
const {a, d, i} = obj;
, where an object literal {...}
is used to create a new object with only the specified properties.const n = {a: obj.a, d: obj.d, i: obj.i};
, where each property value is explicitly assigned using dot notation (obj.property
).Options Compared
The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches:
Pros and Cons
Object Destructuring:
Pros:
Cons:
const {a, b} = obj; const c = a + b
)Property Picking:
Pros:
Cons:
Other Considerations
Library Usage
There is no library explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript engines may optimize or provide additional features for object creation and manipulation.
Special JS Features/Syntax
None are mentioned specifically, but keep in mind that modern JavaScript engines often support advanced features like destructuring, arrow functions, and template literals.
Alternatives
Other alternatives to these approaches include:
Object.assign()
method to create a partial object.Partial
type).{...obj}
) or the Object.create()
method.However, the original benchmark definition primarily focuses on comparing object destructuring and property picking, making these alternatives less relevant.