Benchmark: eval vs evalFunction vs function

Script Preparation code:

var func = Function("return 2 * 3");
var evalFunc = eval('(function(){ return () => 2 * 3; })();');

Tests:

eval
eval("2 * 3");
eval function
evalFunc();
function
func()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
eval
eval function
function

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested, along with the pros and cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three JavaScript functions: `eval`, `evalFunction`, and `function`. The test cases measure the execution time of each function on a specific expression (`2 * 3`).

**Options Compared**

1. **`eval`**: This function evaluates a string as JavaScript code, allowing you to execute arbitrary JavaScript expressions.
	* Pros:
		+ Simple and concise syntax.
		+ Can evaluate complex expressions.
	* Cons:
		+ Security risks due to the ability to execute arbitrary code.
		+ Slow performance compared to other options (more on this later).
2. **`evalFunction`**: This function returns a new function that evaluates a given expression.
	* Pros:
		+ More controlled than `eval`, as it doesn't execute arbitrary code.
		+ Performance is generally better than `eval`.
3. **`function`**: This keyword defines a new, anonymous function.
	* Pros:
		+ Performance is generally better than `eval` due to the lack of overhead from executing code.
		+ More secure than `eval`, as it doesn't execute arbitrary code.

**Library Used**

The benchmark uses the `Function` constructor and the `eval` method in the browser's JavaScript engine. The `evalFunction` test case creates a new function using the `Function` constructor and then executes it using the `()` operator.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. It only utilizes standard JavaScript constructs, such as functions, variables, and string literals.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these options, consider the trade-offs:

* **Security**: If you're working with untrusted input or need to execute arbitrary code, `function` might be a better choice.
* **Performance**: For simple expressions like `2 * 3`, `function` is likely to be faster than `eval`. However, for more complex expressions or security-critical applications, the performance difference may not be significant.
* **Code readability**: `eval` can make code harder to read and understand due to its dynamic nature.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to these options might include:

* Using a just-in-time (JIT) compiler like V8 or SpiderMonkey, which can optimize JavaScript execution at runtime.
* Employing static analysis tools or type checking to prevent the need for dynamic evaluation.
* Utilizing higher-level abstractions, such as functional programming languages or domain-specific languages (DSLs), that abstract away the need for explicit evaluation.

The benchmark results show the performance of each test case on different devices and browsers. In this case, `function` outperforms both `eval` and `evalFunction`, which is expected due to its more efficient execution model.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 13; SM-S908U) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/111.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 111 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
eval	2500586.5 Ops/sec
eval function	14254063.0 Ops/sec
function	14247013.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

eval vs evalFunction vs function (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: eval vs eval function vs function

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

eval

eval function

function

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):