Benchmark: Function call vs. conditional operator 2

Script Preparation code:

var event = { foo: 'foo', bar: 'bar'}
var result = null
function getName1(event) { return event.foo }
function getName2(event) { return event.foo + event.bar }
var flag1 = true
var flag2 = false

Tests:

Function call 1
result = {name: getName1(event)}
Function call 2
result = {name: getName2(event)}
Conditional operator 1
result = {name: flag1 ? event.foo : event.foo + event.bar }
Conditional operator 2
result = {name: flag2 ? event.foo : event.foo + event.bar }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Function call 1
Function call 2
Conditional operator 1
Conditional operator 2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Purpose**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of different approaches in JavaScript: function calls versus conditional operators (ternary operators). The goal is to determine which approach is faster.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines two functions, `getName1` and `getName2`, which take an object as input and return a string. These functions are used in the benchmark test cases. Additionally, two variables, `flag1` and `flag2`, are defined with values of true and false, respectively.

**Html Preparation Code**

The html preparation code is empty, indicating that no HTML content is required for this benchmark.

**Test Cases**

There are four test cases:

1. **Function call 1**: This test case uses the function call approach to access the `foo` property of the input object.
2. **Function call 2**: Similar to the first test case, but it accesses the `bar` property instead of just `foo`.
3. **Conditional operator 1**: This test case uses a ternary operator (conditional operator) to determine which expression to evaluate: accessing `foo` or evaluating the entire condition.
4. **Conditional operator 2**: Similar to the third test case, but it also evaluates the entire condition, even if `flag2` is false.

**Library**

The benchmark does not explicitly use any JavaScript libraries. However, it relies on the browser's built-in JavaScript engine and its implementation of the functions and operators being tested.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None of the test cases rely on special JavaScript features or syntax beyond basic arithmetic operations, function calls, and ternary operators.

**Pros and Cons of Approaches**

1. **Function call approach**: Advantages:
	* More explicit and readable code
	* Easier to understand the intent behind the operation
	* Can be more efficient for certain use cases (e.g., when only accessing a single property)
Disadvantages:
	* May incur overhead due to function invocation
2. **Conditional operator approach**: Advantages:
	* More concise and expressive code
	* Can reduce overhead compared to function calls
	* Easier to inline the condition with the operation being evaluated
Disadvantages:
	* May be less readable for complex conditions or operations

**Benchmark Results**

The benchmark results show that the order of execution matters: the conditional operator approach is generally faster than the function call approach, especially when evaluating simple expressions.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to this benchmark, consider the following:

* Using `let` or `const` instead of `var` for variable declarations
* Optimizing function calls by using caching or memoization
* Implementing more advanced optimization techniques, such as loop unrolling or dead code elimination

Keep in mind that the performance differences between these approaches may be subtle and dependent on specific use cases.

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/119.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 119 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Function call 1	7671837.5 Ops/sec
Function call 2	7142123.0 Ops/sec
Conditional operator 1	7697029.5 Ops/sec
Conditional operator 2	5776191.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Function call vs. conditional operator 2 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Function call 1 vs Function call 2 vs Conditional operator 1 vs Conditional operator 2

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Function call 1

Function call 2

Conditional operator 1

Conditional operator 2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):