Benchmark: class vs object - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

class

const reportsData = Array(1000).map((_, index) => ({
    user: {
        id: index,
        name: 'user' + index
    }
}));

class Report {
	constructor(report) { this.report = report; }
  
  	reporterId() { this.report.user.id; }
  	reporterName() { this.report.user.name; }
}

const classReports = reportsData.map(data => new Report(data));
classReports.forEach(report => console.log(report.reporterId, reporter.name))

​x
 
const reportsData = Array(1000).map((_, index) => ({    user: {        id: index,        name: 'user' + index    }}));​class Report {    constructor(report) { this.report = report; }      reporterId() { this.report.user.id; }    reporterName() { this.report.user.name; }}​const classReports = reportsData.map(data => new Report(data));classReports.forEach(report => console.log(report.reporterId, reporter.name))

object

const reportsData = Array(1000).map((_, index) => ({
    user: {
        id: index,
        name: 'user' + index
    }
}));

const createReport = (report) => {
	return {
    	...report,
      
      	get reporterId() { return this.user.id },
      	get reporterName() { return this.user.name },
    }
}

const objectReports = reportsData.map(data => createReport(data));
objectReports.forEach(report => console.log(report.reporterId, reporter.name))

 
const reportsData = Array(1000).map((_, index) => ({    user: {        id: index,        name: 'user' + index    }}));​const createReport = (report) => {    return {        ...report,              get reporterId() { return this.user.id },        get reporterName() { return this.user.name },    }}​const objectReports = reportsData.map(data => createReport(data));objectReports.forEach(report => console.log(report.reporterId, reporter.name))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Experimental features:

Memory measurements supported only in Chrome.
For precise memory measurements Chrome must be launched with --enable-precise-memory-info flag.
More information: Monitoring JavaScript Memory

Test case name	Result
class
object

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
class	125958.2 Ops/sec
object	150189.4 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 7 months ago):

What is being tested?

MeasureThat.net is testing the performance difference between using classes and objects in JavaScript to create reports with a specific structure.

The benchmark is designed to compare the execution speed of two approaches:

Using a class (Report) to create reports, as shown in the "class" test case.
Creating an object that acts like a report using a constructor function (createReport), as shown in the "object" test case.

Comparison of options

In this benchmark, we have two main options:

Classes: Using classes to create reports is a more traditional approach in JavaScript. Classes provide a way to organize code into namespaces and can be used to define constructors, methods, and properties.
Objects with constructor functions: This approach uses a constructor function (createReport) to create objects that mimic the behavior of a class. The object has properties and methods defined using the this keyword.

Pros and cons

Classes:

Pros:

Easier to read and understand for developers familiar with object-oriented programming (OOP) concepts.
Provides more flexibility in defining constructors, methods, and properties.

Cons:

May have overhead due to the creation of a new scope and the need to define a constructor function.
Less flexible than objects with constructor functions when it comes to creating ad-hoc objects.

Objects with constructor functions:

Pros:

Can be faster since there is no overhead from creating a new scope or defining a constructor function.
Provides more flexibility in creating ad-hoc objects without having to define an entire class.

Cons:

May require more code to achieve the same result as using classes.
Less intuitive for developers unfamiliar with OOP concepts.

Library usage

There are no libraries used in these benchmark test cases. The code is self-contained and only uses built-in JavaScript features.

Special JS feature or syntax

There is no special JS feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It's a simple performance comparison of two approaches.

Alternatives

If you're looking for alternatives to MeasureThat.net, here are a few options:

jsperf: A popular online benchmarking tool that allows you to compare the execution speed of different JavaScript code snippets.
Benchmark.js: A lightweight and flexible benchmarking library for Node.js that provides a simple way to write benchmarks.
Google Closure Compiler: A compiler that optimizes JavaScript code for production, also includes a built-in benchmarking tool.

These alternatives can help you create and run your own benchmarks, but MeasureThat.net is still a convenient option for comparing the performance of different JavaScript approaches.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing the performance difference between using classes and objects in JavaScript to create reports with a specific structure.

The benchmark is designed to compare the execution speed of two approaches:

1. Using a class (`Report`) to create reports, as shown in the "class" test case.
2. Creating an object that acts like a report using a constructor function (`createReport`), as shown in the "object" test case.

**Comparison of options**

In this benchmark, we have two main options:

1. **Classes**: Using classes to create reports is a more traditional approach in JavaScript. Classes provide a way to organize code into namespaces and can be used to define constructors, methods, and properties.
2. **Objects with constructor functions**: This approach uses a constructor function (`createReport`) to create objects that mimic the behavior of a class. The object has properties and methods defined using the `this` keyword.

**Pros and cons**

**Classes:**

Pros:

* Easier to read and understand for developers familiar with object-oriented programming (OOP) concepts.
* Provides more flexibility in defining constructors, methods, and properties.

Cons:

* May have overhead due to the creation of a new scope and the need to define a constructor function.
* Less flexible than objects with constructor functions when it comes to creating ad-hoc objects.

**Objects with constructor functions:**

Pros:

* Can be faster since there is no overhead from creating a new scope or defining a constructor function.
* Provides more flexibility in creating ad-hoc objects without having to define an entire class.

Cons:

* May require more code to achieve the same result as using classes.
* Less intuitive for developers unfamiliar with OOP concepts.

**Library usage**

There are no libraries used in these benchmark test cases. The code is self-contained and only uses built-in JavaScript features.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There is no special JS feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It's a simple performance comparison of two approaches.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to MeasureThat.net, here are a few options:

1. **jsperf**: A popular online benchmarking tool that allows you to compare the execution speed of different JavaScript code snippets.
2. **Benchmark.js**: A lightweight and flexible benchmarking library for Node.js that provides a simple way to write benchmarks.
3. **Google Closure Compiler**: A compiler that optimizes JavaScript code for production, also includes a built-in benchmarking tool.

These alternatives can help you create and run your own benchmarks, but MeasureThat.net is still a convenient option for comparing the performance of different JavaScript approaches.

Related benchmarks:

class vs object (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: class vs object

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

class

object

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 7 months ago):