Benchmark: Re-used function declaration vs Creating arrow function from factory vs Creating plain function from factory

Script Preparation code:

function factory(closureValue) {
  return (b) => closureValue + b;
}

function factoryReused(contextValue) {
  return reused.bind(contextValue);
}

function reused(b) {
  return this + b;
}

function factoryFunc(closureValue) {
  return function newF(b) {
    return closureValue + b;
  }
}

Tests:

Factory of arrow function
var a = factory(2)(3)
Factory of reused function
var a = factoryReused(2)(3)
Factory of plain function
var a = factoryFunc(2)(3)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Factory of arrow function
Factory of reused function
Factory of plain function

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/108.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 108 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Factory of arrow function	5068488.0 Ops/sec
Factory of reused function	1524828.6 Ops/sec
Factory of plain function	5380412.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Definition**

The website `MeasureThat.net` is testing three different approaches for creating functions:

1. **Re-used function declaration**: This approach creates a new function using the `reused` function, binding it to the context value.
2. **Creating arrow function from factory**: This approach uses a factory function to create an arrow function that takes a closure value and returns another function with the `closureValue + b` expression as its body.
3. **Creating plain function from factory**: Similar to the first approach, but instead of using an arrow function, it creates a plain function using the factory function.

**Library**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, the use of the `bind()` method and the creation of functions with dynamic closures suggest that JavaScript's built-in functions are being used.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that arrow functions were introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and are still supported by modern browsers like Chrome 108.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The script preparation code includes three factory functions: `factory`, `factoryReused`, and `factoryFunc`. Each factory function creates a different type of function:

* `factory` creates an arrow function that takes a closure value.
* `factoryReused` creates a plain function by binding the `reused` function to a context value.
* `factoryFunc` creates a plain function using the factory function.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing three options for creating functions:

1. **Creating arrow function from factory**: Uses an arrow function with dynamic closures to create a new function.
2. **Re-used function declaration**: Creates a new function by binding a plain function to a context value.
3. **Creating plain function from factory**: Creates a plain function using the factory function.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

* **Creating arrow function from factory**: Pros:
	+ Concise code
	+ Dynamic closures allow for more flexibility
Cons:
	+ May not be supported by older browsers or environments
* **Re-used function declaration**: Pros:
	+ Uses built-in functions, so should be supported by most browsers and environments
Cons:
	+ Code may be less concise than using arrow functions
* **Creating plain function from factory**: Pros:
	+ Similar syntax to re-used function declaration
Cons:
	+ May not be as efficient or concise as using arrow functions

**Other Considerations**

When choosing an approach, consider the following factors:

* **Browser support**: If you need to support older browsers, use `factoryReused` or `factoryFunc`.
* **Code conciseness**: If code readability is important, use `factory`.
* **Performance**: If performance is critical, use `factory` (arrow function) or `factoryFunc` (plain function).

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches for creating functions include:

* Using the `Function constructor` to create a new function: `new Function('a', 'return closureValue + b;')`
* Using a library like `lodash` that provides utility functions for creating functions
* Using a meta-programming approach, such as using a function factory with dynamic closures

However, these alternatives may not be relevant to the specific use case of this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Re-used function declaration vs Creating arrow function from factory vs Creating plain function from factory (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Factory of arrow function vs Factory of reused function vs Factory of plain function

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Factory of arrow function

Factory of reused function

Factory of plain function

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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