Benchmark: JS use case class x functionsss

Script Preparation code:

//

Tests:

class
// use case class CountUsers { userRepository constructor(userRepository) { this.userRepository = userRepository } execute = async () => { this.validate() const response = await this.userRepository.count() return response } validate = () => { return true } } // repository class UserRepository { count = async () => { return true } } // route const countUsers = new CountUsers(new UserRepository()) countUsers.execute().then(response => { return response })
object literal v1
// Repository const UserRepository = () => { const count = async () => { return true } return { count } } // Use case const CountUsers = userRepository => { const execute = async () => { validate() const response = await userRepository.count() return response } const validate = () => { return true } return { execute } } // Route const userRepository = UserRepository() CountUsers(userRepository) .execute() .then(response => { return response })
only functions
// Repository const count = async () => { return true } // Use case const execute = async repoFunction => { validate() const response = await repoFunction() return response } const validate = () => { return true } // Route execute(count).then(response => { return response })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
class
object literal v1
only functions

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring JavaScript performance can be complex, as it involves various aspects such as syntax, library usage, and hardware differences.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to understand what's being tested:

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark is defined by a JSON object that contains the script preparation code, HTML preparation code (which is null in this case), and a description. The actual performance test is performed using individual test cases.

**Test Cases:**

There are three test cases:

1. **Class**: This test case defines a class `CountUsers` with a `userRepository` dependency, which has an `execute` method that calls the `count` method of the `userRepository`. The `validate` method returns true.
2. **Object Literal v1**: In this test case, the repository is defined as an object literal with a single property `count`, which is an async function returning true. The use case creates an instance of `CountUsers` and calls its `execute` method, passing the repository object to it.
3. **Only Functions**: This test case defines two separate functions: `repoFunction` (which returns true) and `execute` (which takes a function as an argument and calls it). The use case calls `execute` with `repoFunction` as an argument.

**Performance Comparison:**

The benchmark compares the performance of these three test cases on Chrome 118, running on a Linux desktop environment. The results show that:

* **Class**: Takes around 300K executions per second.
* **Object Literal v1**: Takes around 3269K executions per second (slightly faster than Class).
* **Only Functions**: Takes around 3844K executions per second (the fastest).

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

* **Class**: This approach uses a traditional class-based design, which can be more verbose and harder to read. However, it provides a clear separation of concerns between the repository and use case logic.
* **Object Literal v1**: Using an object literal to define the repository is concise but may be less readable than the class-based approach. It also lacks explicit type definitions, which can lead to type-related errors at runtime.
* **Only Functions**: This approach uses pure functions, which can be beneficial for code reuse and testability. However, it may require more careful function composition to achieve the desired behavior.

**Library Usage:**

The `CountUsers` class and `UserRepository` object use a library-like design, with a clear separation between the repository and use case logic. This is similar to a Repository Pattern in software design patterns.

**Special JS Features:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark definition that require specific knowledge of JavaScript beyond basic understanding.

**Alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternatives, you might consider using other JavaScript frameworks like React or Angular for building the use case and repository logic. Alternatively, you could explore alternative design patterns, such as the Service Pattern or the Observer Pattern, to achieve similar performance optimization goals.

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/118.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 118 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
class	300354.0 Ops/sec
object literal v1	3269189.2 Ops/sec
only functions	3844634.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JS use case class x functionsss (version: 5)

test

Comparing performance of: class vs object literal v1 vs only functions

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

class

object literal v1

only functions

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):