Benchmark: mutation vs builder v2

Tests:

mutation
function Point(x, y) { this.x = x this.y = y } Point.prototype.add = function(point) { this.x = this.x + point.x this.y = this.y + point.y } var p1 = new Point(1, 2) var p2 = new Point(3, 4) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) p1.add(p2) console.log(p1)
Builder
function Point(x, y) { this.x = x this.y = y } Point.prototype.add = function(point) { return new Point(this.x + point.x, this.y + point.y) } var p1 = new Point(1, 2) var p2 = new Point(3, 4) var p3 = p1.add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2).add(p2) console.log(p3)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
mutation
Builder

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/116.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 116 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
mutation	51729.2 Ops/sec
Builder	51482.0 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 benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to add points together in JavaScript: mutation and builder patterns. The test case creates a `Point` class with an `add` method that either modifies the existing point (mutation) or returns a new point created by adding another point to it (builder).

**Mutation Approach**

In this approach, the `add` method of the `Point` class modifies the existing point's coordinates directly. This is done by assigning the sum of the current x-coordinate and the x-coordinate of the point being added.

Pros:

* Simple and straightforward implementation
* Easy to understand for beginners

Cons:

* Modifies the original object, which can be problematic if the original object needs to remain unchanged
* Can lead to unexpected behavior if not properly tested

**Builder Approach**

In this approach, the `add` method returns a new `Point` object created by adding another point to the existing one. This is done by creating a new instance of the `Point` class with the sum of the current x-coordinate and the x-coordinate of the point being added.

Pros:

* Does not modify the original object
* Returns a new, independent object that can be used as needed

Cons:

* More complex implementation than the mutation approach
* May require additional memory allocation for creating new objects

**Library Used**

The test case uses the `Point` class and its `add` method without any external libraries. However, it's worth noting that in a real-world scenario, you might want to use a more robust library or framework that provides similar functionality.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is empty, which means the test case uses default settings and doesn't require any specific setup or configuration.

**Alternatives to Mutation and Builder Approaches**

Other approaches to add points together might include:

* Immutable data structures: Instead of modifying the original point, you could create a new object with the updated coordinates. This approach is similar to the builder pattern but uses immutable data structures.
* Recursion: You could implement an `add` method that recursively creates new `Point` objects by adding another point to the existing one.
* Functional programming: You might use functional programming techniques, such as map-reduce or closures, to create a new point object with the updated coordinates.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might have their own trade-offs and complexities, but they can be useful in certain situations.

Related benchmarks:

mutation vs builder v2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: mutation vs Builder

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

mutation

Builder

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):