Benchmark: test access propery vs call method

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {
  key: 12,
  getKey: (delta) => 12 + delta,
}

Tests:

prop access
let result = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 100; i += 1) result += obj.key;
method call
let result = 0; for (let i = 0; i < 100; i += 1) result += obj.getKey(4);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
prop access
method call

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/115.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 115 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
prop access	171067.5 Ops/sec
method call	170455.4 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**
The first part of the JSON defines a benchmark named "test access propery vs call method". This benchmark tests the performance difference between accessing an object property directly (`obj.key`) versus calling a method on that property (`obj.getKey()`).

**Script Preparation Code**
The script preparation code is provided as a JavaScript object literal:
```javascript
var obj = {
  key: 12,
  getKey: (delta) => 12 + delta,
};
```
This object has two properties: `key` with value `12`, and a method `getKey` that takes an optional `delta` parameter.

**Html Preparation Code**
There is no HTML preparation code provided, so we'll assume this benchmark only tests JavaScript performance in isolation.

**Individual Test Cases**
The benchmark consists of two individual test cases:

1. **"prop access"`**: This test case accesses the `key` property directly (`obj.key`) and adds its value to a running total 100 times.
2. **"method call"`**: This test case calls the `getKey` method on the object with an argument of 4, and again adds its result to a running total 100 times.

**Comparison**
The benchmark is comparing two approaches:

1. Direct property access (`obj.key`)
2. Method call with a single argument (`obj.getKey(4)`)

The comparison aims to determine which approach is faster in terms of execution speed.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Direct Property Access (prop access)**:
	+ Pros: Likely to be faster, as it's a simple and direct access.
	+ Cons: May not account for method call overhead or potential caching effects.
* **Method Call (method call)**:
	+ Pros: Might account for method call overhead and potential caching effects.
	+ Cons: Could be slower due to the function call and argument passing.

**Library Usage**
The `getKey` method uses a JavaScript feature called an arrow function, which is a shorthand syntax for defining small, single-expression functions. The purpose of this library (in this case, the arrow function) is to simplify the definition of small functions.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**
No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to modify this benchmark, here are some alternative approaches:

1. Use a different method call syntax (e.g., `obj.getKey.call(obj, 4)`).
2. Add additional arguments or complexity to the property access or method call.
3. Test with different data types or structures for the object properties and methods.
4. Compare performance with other programming languages or frameworks.

Keep in mind that modifying a benchmark should be done thoughtfully to ensure it remains relevant and accurate, rather than introducing unnecessary complexity or biases.

Related benchmarks:

test access propery vs call method (version: 2)

test access propery vs call method

Comparing performance of: prop access vs method call

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

prop access

method call

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):