var obj = {a: 'a', b: 'b'};
const { a, b } = obj;
const a = obj.a;
const b = obj.b;
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Destructure | |
Traditional |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Destructure | 92688704.0 Ops/sec |
Traditional | 88435360.0 Ops/sec |
Measuring the performance of JavaScript destructure vs traditional assignment can be a fascinating experiment.
What is being tested?
The provided JSON benchmark defines two test cases:
const { a, b } = obj;
) to extract values from an object.const a = obj.a; const b = obj.b;
) to achieve the same result.Options compared
The two options are being compared in terms of their execution performance. The goal is to determine which approach is faster and more efficient.
Pros and Cons
In terms of execution performance, destructuring is often slower due to its syntax complexity. However, modern JavaScript engines have made significant progress in optimizing destructure syntax, so the difference may be smaller than expected.
Library and purpose
There is no specific library mentioned in the provided JSON benchmark definition. The tests only use built-in JavaScript features.
Special JS feature or syntax
The test case uses a modern JavaScript feature: Destructuring syntax (const { a, b } = obj;
). This syntax was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and has since become widely adopted.
Other alternatives
If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:
{ ...obj }
) to achieve similar results as destructuring.const [a, b] = obj;
).obj.a
, obj.b
) instead of traditional assignment.These alternatives might not provide a significant performance difference in this specific benchmark but can be useful for exploring different programming paradigms and syntaxes.