const obj = {a: 'stringA', b: 'stringB', c: 'stringC' };
const a = obj.a;
console.log(a);
const obj = {a: 'stringA', b: 'stringB', c: 'stringC' };
const { a } = obj;
console.log(a);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Assign | |
Destructure |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Assign | 485240.3 Ops/sec |
Destructure | 475301.7 Ops/sec |
I'll break down the provided benchmark and its options, pros, cons, and considerations.
Benchmark Overview
The MeasureThat.net benchmark compares two approaches to assign values in JavaScript: traditional assignment using const
and destructuring an object.
Options Compared
const
: This approach uses a traditional assignment syntax, where the value of obj.a
is directly copied into the variable a
. This method is straightforward but might not be as efficient or safe in some cases.obj.a
and assigns it to the variable a
.Pros and Cons
Assignment using const
:
Pros:
Cons:
Destructuring an object:
Pros:
Cons:
Library Considerations
None.
Special JS Feature/Syntax
The test case uses the const
keyword, which is a fundamental JavaScript feature. No special syntax is required beyond basic understanding of variable declarations and assignment.
Other Alternatives
For comparison purposes, MeasureThat.net might consider alternatives like:
let
or var
instead of const
: This would involve testing the performance impact of using mutable variables.Keep in mind that MeasureThat.net's goal is to create a comprehensive benchmarking platform, so exploring various alternatives can help ensure a more representative picture of performance and readability trade-offs.