Benchmark: Nested proxy creation

Script Preparation code:

object = {
    value: {sub: 'data'}
};
proxy = new Proxy(object, {})
handler = {
    get(target, prop, receiver) {
        return new Proxy(Reflect.get(target, prop, receiver), handler)
    },
    set(target, prop, new_value, receiver) {
        return Reflect.set(target, prop, new_value, receiver)
    }
}
proxyWithHandler = new Proxy(object, {
	get(target, prop, receiver) {
    	return Reflect.get(target, prop, receiver)
    }
})
proxyWithHandler2 = new Proxy(object, handler)

Tests:

Direct access
object.value
Proxied access with no get handler
proxy.value
Proxied access with forward get handler
proxyWithHandler.value
Proxied access with proxy wrapping get handler
proxyWithHandler2.value
Direct set
object.value = {sub: "data2"}
Proxied set with no set handler
proxy.value = {sub: "data2"}
Proxied set with forward set handler
proxyWithHandler2.value = {sub: "data2"}

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Direct access
Proxied access with no get handler
Proxied access with forward get handler
Proxied access with proxy wrapping get handler
Direct set
Proxied set with no set handler
Proxied set with forward set handler

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 11 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Direct access	15164571.0 Ops/sec
Proxied access with no get handler	14955357.0 Ops/sec
Proxied access with forward get handler	7322598.5 Ops/sec
Proxied access with proxy wrapping get handler	3816207.0 Ops/sec
Direct set	14766445.0 Ops/sec
Proxied set with no set handler	4803565.5 Ops/sec
Proxied set with forward set handler	3491173.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is represented by the JSON file you provided. It defines a JavaScript object `object` with a nested property `value`. A proxy object `proxy` is created from `object`, and another proxy object `proxyWithHandler` is created from `object` using a custom handler. Additionally, two more proxy objects, `proxyWithHandler2` and another `proxyWithHandler`, are created.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares different ways to access and set properties on these proxy objects:

1. **Direct Access**: Directly accessing the `value` property of `object`.
2. **Proxied Access with No Get Handler**: Accessing the `value` property of `proxy` without setting up a get handler.
3. **Proxied Access with Forward Get Handler**: Accessing the `value` property of `proxyWithHandler` using the default get handler provided by the proxy object creation.
4. **Proxied Access with Proxy Wrapping Get Handler**: Similar to the previous point, but using a custom get handler wrapped around the proxy object.
5. **Direct Set**: Setting the `value` property of `object` directly.
6. **Proxied Set with No Set Handler**: Setting the `value` property of `proxy` without setting up a set handler.
7. **Proxied Set with Forward Set Handler**: Setting the `value` property of `proxyWithHandler2` using the default set handler provided by the proxy object creation.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of each option:

1. **Direct Access**: Fastest, but may not be necessary in all scenarios.
	* Pros: Simple, fast.
	* Cons: May bypass security checks or optimization opportunities.
2. **Proxied Access with No Get Handler**: Faster than direct access, as the proxy object can optimize the lookup process.
	* Pros: Optimized lookup, faster.
	* Cons: Security risks if not properly configured, may bypass some optimizations.
3. **Proxied Access with Forward Get Handler**: Similar to proxied access without a get handler, but uses the default get handler provided by the proxy object creation.
	* Pros: Easy to set up and use, optimized lookup.
	* Cons: May bypass security checks or optimization opportunities.
4. **Proxied Access with Proxy Wrapping Get Handler**: Customizable get handler wrapped around the proxy object.
	* Pros: Highly customizable, can optimize lookup process further.
	* Cons: More complex setup, may introduce additional overhead.
5. **Direct Set**: Fastest way to set a property value, but may not be necessary in all scenarios.
	* Pros: Simple, fast.
	* Cons: May bypass security checks or optimization opportunities.
6. **Proxied Set with No Set Handler**: Faster than direct set, as the proxy object can optimize the setter process.
	* Pros: Optimized setter, faster.
	* Cons: Security risks if not properly configured, may bypass some optimizations.
7. **Proxied Set with Forward Set Handler**: Similar to proxied set without a set handler, but uses the default set handler provided by the proxy object creation.
	* Pros: Easy to set up and use, optimized setter.
	* Cons: May bypass security checks or optimization opportunities.

**Other Considerations**

When using proxies in JavaScript, it's essential to consider security risks if not properly configured. Proxies can be used to bypass some optimizations, such as caching or memory management, which may impact performance.

Additionally, the choice of get and set handlers depends on the specific use case and requirements. In some scenarios, a custom handler may be necessary to optimize the lookup process further.

**Benchmark Results**

The benchmark results you provided show the execution time for each test case. The fastest option is likely **Proxied Access with No Get Handler**, followed closely by **Direct Access**. However, the actual performance difference between these options may vary depending on the specific use case and requirements.

It's also worth noting that some of the slower options, such as **Proxied Set with No Set Handler** and **Proxied Set with Forward Set Handler**, may still be useful in certain scenarios where security or optimization are critical.

Related benchmarks:

Nested proxy creation (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Direct access vs Proxied access with no get handler vs Proxied access with forward get handler vs Proxied access with proxy wrapping get handler vs Direct set vs Proxied set with no set handler vs Proxied set with forward set handler

Created: 11 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Direct access

Proxied access with no get handler

Proxied access with forward get handler

Proxied access with proxy wrapping get handler

Direct set

Proxied set with no set handler

Proxied set with forward set handler

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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