Benchmark: making proxies vs defining getters properties

Script Preparation code:

object = {
    name: 'toto'
};
makeProxy = (obj) => new Proxy(obj, {
    get(target, prop, receiver) {
        return target[prop]
    }
});
makeGetters = (obj) => {
    objectWithGetter = {
        inner: obj
    }

    for (const [key, value] of Object.entries(obj)) {
        Object.defineProperty(objectWithGetter, key, {
            get: function() {
                return this.inner[key];
            }
        })
    }
    return objectWithGetter;
}

Tests:

makeProxy
makeProxy(object)
makeGetters
makeGetters(object)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
makeProxy
makeGetters

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to create getters and properties for an object: using `Proxy` objects (also known as "proxies") versus defining getters manually.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Using Proxies (`makeProxy` function)**: This approach creates a proxy object that intercepts property access. When a property is accessed, the proxy returns the value of the original object's property.
2. **Defining Getters Manually (`makeGetters` function)**: This approach creates a new object with getters defined for each property.

**Pros and Cons**

**Using Proxies (`makeProxy` function):**

Pros:

* Easier to implement, as it only requires creating a proxy object
* Less boilerplate code required

Cons:

* May have performance implications due to the overhead of creating and maintaining proxies
* Limited control over the proxy behavior (e.g., cannot change the getter behavior)

**Defining Getters Manually (`makeGetters` function):**

Pros:

* More control over the getter behavior, as getters can be defined individually
* Can be more efficient, as no additional overhead is required to create a proxy object

Cons:

* Requires more boilerplate code and manual effort
* May have performance implications due to the additional work required to define getters manually

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark also considers the use of JavaScript's `Proxy` objects, which are defined in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). The `makeProxy` function uses this feature to create proxies.

**Library/Utility Functionality**

Neither of the options requires any external libraries or utility functions beyond the built-in JavaScript features.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The benchmark utilizes ES6 syntax, specifically the use of arrow functions (`=>`) and template literals (`\r\n`). These features are widely supported in modern JavaScript environments.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to explore alternative approaches, consider:

* Using a library like `getters` or `decorator` that provides higher-order functions for defining getters and properties.
* Implementing getters and properties manually using object-oriented programming principles (e.g., using inheritance or prototypes).

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional complexity or performance implications.

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/118.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 118 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
makeProxy	4415195.5 Ops/sec
makeGetters	1157224.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

making proxies vs defining getters properties (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: makeProxy vs makeGetters

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

makeProxy

makeGetters

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):