Benchmark: higher order function vs simple function perf checkasdasda sdfdfgasdas

Script Preparation code:

var artifacts = {
    getById: () => [Math.random()]
}

function flatten(artifacts, artifactId) {
    const getDependencies1 = (artifactId) => artifacts.getById(artifactId);
    return [
        ...getDependencies1(artifactId)
    ]
}

function createFlattenr(artifacts){
    const getDependencies2 = (artifactId) => artifacts.getById(artifactId);
    return (artifactId) => {
        return [
            ...getDependencies2(artifactId)
        ]
    }
}

Tests:

simple function
for(var i = 0; i < 100; i++) { flatten(artifacts, i) }
higher order function
const f = createFlattenr(artifacts) for(var i = 0; i < 100; i++) { f(i) }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
simple function
higher order function

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

The provided JSON represents two benchmark test cases, which are being compared to measure their performance difference. The first test case is named "higher order function vs simple function perf check", and it consists of two individual test cases: "simple function" and "higher order function".

**Benchmark Test Case 1: Higher Order Function**

In this test case, the `flatten` function takes an artifact ID as an argument and returns an array containing the result of calling `getDependencies1` with the same artifact ID. The `createFlattenr` function is a higher-order function that takes the `artifacts` object as an argument and returns another function that can be used to create the `flatten` function.

**Benchmark Test Case 2: Simple Function**

In this test case, the `flatten` function is called directly with two arguments: the `artifacts` object and an artifact ID. This implementation does not use a higher-order function like `createFlattenr`.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Higher Order Function (HOF)**: Using the `createFlattenr` function to create the `flatten` function.
2. **Simple Function**: Calling the `flatten` function directly without using a HOF.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Higher Order Function (HOF)**
	+ Pros:
		- Can be more flexible and reusable, as it can be used with different artifact IDs.
		- Can avoid code duplication by reusing the same `getDependencies1` function.
	+ Cons:
		- May introduce additional overhead due to the creation of a new function object.
		- Can lead to slower performance if the `createFlattenr` function is more complex or has more dependencies.
* **Simple Function**
	+ Pros:
		- Is often simpler and more straightforward, with fewer lines of code.
		- Can be faster since it doesn't involve creating a new function object.
	+ Cons:
		- May lead to code duplication if the same logic is used multiple times.

**Library and Special JS Features**

The provided benchmark uses no external libraries. However, it does use some special JavaScript features:

* **Arrow Functions**: The `createFlattenr` function and the `getDependencies2` function are defined using arrow functions, which can help with code readability and avoid the creation of new scope objects.
* **Template Literals**: The `Html Preparation Code` property is empty, but template literals (e.g., `"var artifacts = {\n  ..."` ) could be used to define more complex HTML structures.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to benchmark other approaches, you could consider:

1. Using a different higher-order function creation approach, such as using the `Function` constructor or a functional programming library like Lodash.
2. Comparing multiple optimization techniques, such as caching, memoization, or lazy loading.
3. Measuring performance differences between different JavaScript engines or versions (e.g., V8, SpiderMonkey).

Keep in mind that the specific benchmark design and test cases should be tailored to your specific use case and goals.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.183 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 86 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
simple function	24452.1 Ops/sec
higher order function	47806.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

higher order function vs simple function perf checkasdasda sdfdfgasdas (version: 0)

higher order function vs simple function perf check

Comparing performance of: simple function vs higher order function

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

simple function

higher order function

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):