Benchmark: Destructuring vs Direct Access Performance in JavaScript

Destructuring vs Direct Access Performance in JavaScript (version: 0)

This benchmark tests the performance difference between destructuring and direct access of object properties in JavaScript. The goal is to evaluate which method is faster for accessing multiple properties of an object.

Comparing performance of: Destructuring access vs Direct access

Created: 7 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Tests:

Destructuring access
const data = { id: 123, name: 'John Doe', age: 30, email: 'john.doe@example.com' }; const { id, name, age, email } = data;
Direct access
const data = { id: 123, name: 'John Doe', age: 30, email: 'john.doe@example.com' }; const id = data.id; const name = data.name; const age = data.age; const email = data.email;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Destructuring access
Direct access

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 break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches:

1. **Destructuring**: This method involves assigning multiple properties from an object to variables using destructuring syntax (e.g., `const { id, name, age, email } = data;`).
2. **Direct Access**: This method involves accessing individual properties directly (e.g., `const id = data.id; const name = data.name; const age = data.age; const email = data.email;`).

**Pros and Cons**

* **Destructuring**:
	+ Pros: Simplifies the code, making it more concise and readable. It also allows for easier error handling and type checking.
	+ Cons: May incur a performance overhead due to the additional creation of variables and potential type coercion.
* **Direct Access**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster since it directly accesses the properties without creating intermediate variables.
	+ Cons: Requires more lines of code, making it less readable and prone to errors.

**Library**

The benchmark does not explicitly mention using any external libraries. However, it's worth noting that some modern JavaScript engines and browsers may optimize destructuring or direct access in certain contexts (e.g., with `Object.assign()` or `Array.prototype.reduce()`).

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

This benchmark uses the following special feature:

* **Destructuring assignment**: This syntax was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and allows assigning multiple values from an object to variables.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between these two approaches on a specific test case, which involves creating an object `data` with four properties (`id`, `name`, `age`, and `email`) and then accessing those properties using both destructuring and direct access methods.

To get the most accurate results, the benchmark likely:

1. Warm-up the JavaScript engine by running some initial code before starting the test.
2. Uses a consistent input data format to ensure repeatability.
3. Measures the execution time of each test case, considering factors like garbage collection and other background processes that might affect performance.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for measuring performance differences between destructuring and direct access in JavaScript might include:

1. Using `performance.now()` or `requestAnimationFrame()` to measure execution times.
2. Creating a custom benchmarking framework using WebAssembly or other low-level APIs.
3. Comparing performance with other programming languages, such as C++ or Rust, which may have more efficient ways of accessing object properties.

In conclusion, the MeasureThat.net benchmark provides a clear comparison between destructuring and direct access methods for accessing object properties in JavaScript. While there are pros and cons to each approach, the choice ultimately depends on the specific use case and performance requirements.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/124.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 124 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Destructuring access	153438912.0 Ops/sec
Direct access	172443808.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks: