Benchmark: Calling a function inside whatever

Script Preparation code:

// stop using classes!

Tests:

Obj
const something = {} something.get = () => true something.get()
Obj literal
const something = { get: () => true } something.get()
Fn
const something = () => ({ get: () => true }) something().get()
Prototype
function something() {} something.prototype.get = () => true new something().get()
Class
class something { get() { return true } } new something().get()
Fn 2
function something() { return { get: () => true } } something().get()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Obj
Obj literal
Fn
Prototype
Class
Fn 2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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/110.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 110 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Obj	238033232.0 Ops/sec
Obj literal	242471296.0 Ops/sec
Fn	243921712.0 Ops/sec
Prototype	558466.2 Ops/sec
Class	369497.8 Ops/sec
Fn 2	226164272.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**What is tested?**

MeasureThat.net tests how fast different approaches are to call a function inside an object literal, using various JavaScript features like `const`, `obj` literals, functions, prototypes, classes, and their combinations. The goal is to determine which approach is the fastest.

**Options compared:**

There are two primary options being compared:

1. **Using an `obj` literal**: Creating a simple object with a single property, where that property is a function.
2. **Creating an object on the fly using parentheses and then immediately accessing its properties**: This creates an object without explicitly declaring it.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

**Obj Literal:**

Pros:

* Easier to read and understand
* Less memory allocation overhead

Cons:

* May require additional checks or manipulations before calling the function

**Creating an Object on the Fly:**

Pros:

* More flexible, as you can dynamically create properties with different values
* Can be faster, since there's less overhead in creating a new object

Cons:

* May have higher memory allocation overhead
* Less readable and maintainable for complex use cases

In general, creating an object on the fly is likely to outperform using an `obj` literal when:

* You need more control over property values or keys.
* You're working with large amounts of data that require rapid object creation.

However, if readability and maintainability are crucial, using an `obj` literal might be a better choice.

**Library usage:**

There's no specific library mentioned in the provided benchmark data. The tests seem to focus solely on JavaScript language features and syntax.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

One notable aspect is that some of these benchmarks use shorthand notation for object literals, such as:

* `const something = {\r\n\tget: () => true\r\n}\r\nsomething.get()`
* `function something() {\r\n\treturn {\r\n\t\tget: () => true\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\nsomething().get()`

This notation uses the arrow function syntax (`=>`) and shorthand object literals (e.g., `\t` instead of `tab`).

**Alternatives:**

To create similar benchmarks, you could consider testing other JavaScript features, such as:

* Using `let` or `var` instead of `const`.
* Using `class` syntax for object creation.
* Creating objects using methods like `Object.create()` or `Object.assign()`.
* Comparing performance with different type annotations (e.g., `let`, `const`, `var`) or property access patterns.

Keep in mind that each benchmark should be designed to isolate specific language features or syntax, ensuring accurate and relevant results.

Related benchmarks:

Calling a function inside whatever (version: 1)

const, obj literal, function, prototype, class

Comparing performance of: Obj vs Obj literal vs Fn vs Prototype vs Class vs Fn 2

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Obj

Obj literal

Fn

Prototype

Class

Fn 2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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