Benchmark: Object.freeze vs Object.seal vs Native

Tests:

Freeze
const obj = Object.freeze({});
Seal
const obj = Object.seal({});
Native
const obj = {};

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Freeze
Seal
Native

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 explaining the benchmark and its various aspects.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case, which compares the performance of three different approaches: `Object.freeze()`, `Object.seal()`, and native object creation. The goal is to determine which approach is the fastest in terms of execution speed.

**Options compared**

There are two primary options being compared:

1. **`Object.freeze()`**: This method creates a new object that is frozen, meaning its properties cannot be modified.
2. **`Object.seal()`**: Similar to `Object.freeze()`, but it only seals certain properties, preventing them from being modified. Other properties can still be modified.

The third option, **native object creation**, creates an object without any special properties or methods, allowing for the most basic and efficient object creation.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of each approach:

*   **`Object.freeze()`**: Pros:
    *   Ensures that all properties are immutable.
    *   Provides strong security guarantees.
    *
    *   Cons:
    *   Can lead to slower execution due to the overhead of creating a frozen object.
    *   May not be necessary for most use cases, as only certain properties need to be immutable.
*   **`Object.seal()`**: Pros:
    *   Offers a balance between security and performance.
    *   Only seals specific properties, reducing unnecessary overhead.
*
*   Cons:
    *   Not all browsers support `Object.seal()`, which may impact compatibility.
    *   May not provide the same level of security as `Object.freeze()` for certain use cases.
*   **Native object creation**: Pros:
    *   Provides the fastest execution speed, as no special methods or properties are created.
    *   Suitable for most general-purpose JavaScript applications.
*
*   Cons:
    *   Does not offer any additional security benefits over native object creation.

**Library and its purpose**

None of the provided benchmark tests utilize external libraries. All scripts rely on built-in JavaScript objects (`Object`, `Array`, etc.) to test performance differences.

**Special JS features or syntax**

None of the benchmark test cases use special JavaScript features or syntax. They only employ basic object-oriented programming concepts, making them accessible to a wide range of software engineers.

**Other alternatives**

If you'd like to explore alternative approaches or libraries for microbenchmarking, consider the following:

*   **Benchmark.js**: A popular open-source benchmarking library that provides a simple and flexible way to create benchmarks.
*   **Testosterone**: Another well-known benchmarking framework that offers advanced features and tools for creating effective benchmarks.
*   **jsperf**: An older but still widely used benchmarking tool that allows users to compare the performance of different JavaScript implementations.

Feel free to explore these alternatives if you'd like to experiment with different approaches or libraries.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 15_5 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/15.5 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Mobile Safari 15 on iOS 15.5

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Freeze	6310111.0 Ops/sec
Seal	6092402.5 Ops/sec
Native	403335552.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Object.freeze vs Object.seal vs Native (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Freeze vs Seal vs Native

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Freeze

Seal

Native

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):