Benchmark: let or without let (3)

Script Preparation code:

let i = 0;

AخA
 
let i = 0;

Tests:

with let

let j = 0
for(let x = 0; x < 100000; x++) {
	j++;
}

​x
 
let j = 0for(let x = 0; x < 100000; x++) {    j++;}​

without let

i = 0;
for(let x = 0; x < 100000; x++) {
	i++;
}

 
i = 0;for(let x = 0; x < 100000; x++) {    i++;}

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
with let
without let

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
with let	15576.4 Ops/sec
without let	5601.9 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

I'll break down the provided benchmarking data in an easy-to-understand manner.

Benchmark Definition and Options

The benchmark is comparing two JavaScript options:

let (the option being tested)
Without let (the baseline option)

In other words, the test is measuring how the presence of a variable declaration (let) affects the performance of the code.

Pros and Cons of each approach:

With let:
- Pros:
  - Encapsulation: let variables are scoped to their block, which can improve code organization and readability.
  - Reduced polluting global namespace: Without let, variable names might conflict with other global variables, leading to unexpected behavior.
- Cons:
  - Overhead: In some cases, creating a new scope for each assignment operation (using let) might introduce additional overhead due to the creation of a new block.
Without let:
- Pros:
  - Reduced overhead: Without creating a new scope, this option can potentially be faster since there is no need to create a new variable declaration.
- Cons:
  - Polluting global namespace: If not used carefully, variables declared without let might lead to conflicts with other global variables.

Library and Special Features

There are no libraries or special features mentioned in the provided benchmarking data. The test cases rely solely on JavaScript's basic syntax.

Other Considerations

Block Scoping: In both test cases, a new block is created using the for loop. This block scoping behavior can affect the performance of the code.
Assignment Operations: Both options use simple assignment operations (++) to increment variables. However, without let, the variable declaration is implicit and might be subject to some overhead.

Alternatives

If you need a better understanding of this benchmark or want to explore different options:

Consider using other JavaScript frameworks like Jest or Mocha for testing and benchmarking.
Look into libraries that provide performance metrics, such as perf_hooks (Node.js) or Web API's PerformanceObserver.
You might also consider exploring different compiler optimizations and runtime settings in your specific use case.

Keep this information in mind when analyzing the results of this particular benchmark.

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmarking data in an easy-to-understand manner.

**Benchmark Definition and Options**

The benchmark is comparing two JavaScript options:

1. `let` (the option being tested)
2. Without `let` (the baseline option)

In other words, the test is measuring how the presence of a variable declaration (`let`) affects the performance of the code.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

*   **With `let`:**
    *   Pros:
        *   Encapsulation: `let` variables are scoped to their block, which can improve code organization and readability.
        *   Reduced polluting global namespace: Without `let`, variable names might conflict with other global variables, leading to unexpected behavior.
    *   Cons:
        *   Overhead: In some cases, creating a new scope for each assignment operation (using `let`) might introduce additional overhead due to the creation of a new block.

*   **Without `let`:**
    *   Pros:
        *   Reduced overhead: Without creating a new scope, this option can potentially be faster since there is no need to create a new variable declaration.
    *   Cons:
        *   Polluting global namespace: If not used carefully, variables declared without `let` might lead to conflicts with other global variables.

**Library and Special Features**

There are no libraries or special features mentioned in the provided benchmarking data. The test cases rely solely on JavaScript's basic syntax.

**Other Considerations**

*   **Block Scoping**: In both test cases, a new block is created using the `for` loop. This block scoping behavior can affect the performance of the code.
*   **Assignment Operations**: Both options use simple assignment operations (`++`) to increment variables. However, without `let`, the variable declaration is implicit and might be subject to some overhead.

**Alternatives**

If you need a better understanding of this benchmark or want to explore different options:

*   Consider using other JavaScript frameworks like Jest or Mocha for testing and benchmarking.
*   Look into libraries that provide performance metrics, such as `perf_hooks` (Node.js) or Web API's `PerformanceObserver`.
*   You might also consider exploring different compiler optimizations and runtime settings in your specific use case.

Keep this information in mind when analyzing the results of this particular benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

let or without let (3) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: with let vs without let

Created: 9 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result