Benchmark: Adding fields to functions

Tests:

fun-assign
var f; var sum = 0; for(var i = 0; i <= 100000; i += 1) { f = function(j) { return j; }; f.name = "f"; sum += f(i); } console.log(f.name);
no-assign-named
var f; var sum = 0; for(var i = 0; i <= 100000; i += 1) { f = function f(j) { return j; }; sum += f(i); } console.log(f.name);
object-assign
var f; var sum = 0; var o = {}; for(var i = 0; i <= 100000; i += 1) { f = function f(j) { return j; }; o.name = "f"; sum += f(i); } console.log(f.name + o.name);
define-prop
var f; var sum = 0; for(var i = 0; i <= 100000; i += 1) { f = function(j) { return j; }; Object.defineProperty(f, 'name', {value: 'f'}); sum += f(i); } console.log(f.name);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
fun-assign
no-assign-named
object-assign
define-prop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided JSON represents a set of JavaScript microbenchmarks that test the performance of adding fields to functions.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is the code snippet that runs the test case. In this case, there are four test cases:

1. **"fun-assign"`**: This test case checks the performance of assigning a new function with a named property. The code creates a new function `f` and assigns it to a variable `j`, then sets the `name` property of `f` and calls it.
2. **"no-assign-named"`**: Similar to the previous test, but without assigning a name to the new function.
3. **"object-assign"`**: This test case checks the performance of adding a named property to an object. The code creates an object `o`, sets its `name` property, and then calls a new function `f`.
4. **"define-prop"`**: This test case checks the performance of using `Object.defineProperty()` to add a named property to a function.

**Options being compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of four different approaches:

1. Assigning a new function with a named property (`fun-assign` and `no-assign-named`)
2. Adding a named property to an object (`object-assign`)
3. Using `Object.defineProperty()` to add a named property to a function (`define-prop`)

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

1. **Assigning a new function with a named property**: This approach is simple and efficient, but it can lead to naming conflicts if the same name is used for different functions.
2. **Adding a named property to an object**: This approach is more explicit and avoid naming conflicts, but it may be slower due to the overhead of object creation and property addition.
3. **Using `Object.defineProperty()` to add a named property to a function**: This approach is more flexible and can handle complex scenarios, but it may be slower due to the overhead of defining a new property on an existing function.

**Library and syntax**

None of the test cases use any external libraries or special JavaScript features.

**Other considerations**

1. **Variable scoping**: The tests assume that the variables `i`, `f`, and `j` are in scope, which may not be the case in all environments.
2. **Function hoisting**: In some browsers, functions may be hoisted to the top of their scope, which could affect the performance of the tests.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches or tools to measure JavaScript performance, consider:

1. **Benchmark.js**: A popular benchmarking library that provides a simple API for measuring performance.
2. **SpiderMonkey**: The JavaScript engine used by Mozilla Firefox, which can be used for benchmarking purposes.
3. **V8**: The JavaScript engine used by Google Chrome, which can be used for benchmarking purposes.

Note that the `MeasureThat.net` website is specifically designed to measure the performance of specific JavaScript features and libraries, so it's likely that these alternatives may not provide the same level of detail or accuracy as the tests run on this platform.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu Chromium/53.0.2785.143 Chrome/53.0.2785.143 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chromium 53 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
fun-assign	147.3 Ops/sec
no-assign-named	475.8 Ops/sec
object-assign	434.6 Ops/sec
define-prop	36.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Adding fields to functions (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: fun-assign vs no-assign-named vs object-assign vs define-prop

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

fun-assign

no-assign-named

object-assign

define-prop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):