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

Benchmark Overview

The benchmark is measuring the performance of two approaches to outputting logs in a JavaScript environment:

1. Using the built-in console.log function (native log)
2. Creating an empty log function within a custom console object (empty function)

What's being tested?

The benchmark is testing the speed and efficiency of these two approaches when logging a string "here" 1000 times in a loop.

Options compared

There are two options being compared:

1. Native Log: Using the built-in console.log function, which is part of the JavaScript language standard.
2. Empty Function: Creating an empty log function within a custom console object. This approach requires additional code to implement the log functionality.

Pros and Cons

Native Log

Pros:

• Faster execution time: Since it's a built-in function, it's likely to be implemented in native code, making it faster.
• Less code to write: No need to create an empty log function or manage its implementation details.

Cons:

• Limited control: The behavior of the built-in console.log function might not be fully customizable.
• Not applicable for custom logging needs: If you want to implement custom log formatting, buffering, or other features, this approach won't work.

Empty Function

Pros:

• More control: You can customize the behavior and implementation details of your custom log function.
• Reusable: This approach is more versatile, as it can be applied to different logging scenarios.

Cons:

• Slower execution time: Creating an empty log function requires additional code, which might lead to slower performance compared to the native log.
• More code to write: You need to create and implement the custom log function, which adds overhead.

Library usage

In this benchmark, a library is not explicitly mentioned. However, it's worth noting that MeasureThat.net often uses libraries like V8 (Google's JavaScript engine) or SpiderMonkey ( Mozilla's JavaScript engine) for benchmarking purposes.

Special JS feature or syntax

There are no special features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. It's a straightforward comparison of two basic approaches to outputting logs.

Alternatives

Other alternatives to measure the performance of logging functions include:

• Using a logging library like Log4js, Winston, or Bunyan.
• Implementing custom logging using native code (e.g., using C++ for high-performance applications).
• Utilizing async logging mechanisms, which can introduce additional overhead but offer more flexibility.

Keep in mind that benchmarking is an ongoing process, and new benchmarks are added to MeasureThat.net regularly. This explanation aims to provide a general understanding of the benchmark's purpose and insights into the options being compared.