Benchmark: Proxy function invocation - apply vs reflect

Script Preparation code:

fun = function(a) {
    return a * 2
}
proxyWithApply = new Proxy(fun, {
    apply(target, thisArg, argArray) {
        return target.apply(thisArg, argArray)
    }
})
proxyWithReflect = new Proxy(fun, {
    apply(target, thisArg, argArray) {
        return Reflect.apply(target, thisArg, argArray)
    }
})

obj = {
    calc: fun
}
objWithPatch = {
    calc: proxyWithApply
}
objWithProxy = new Proxy(obj, {
    get(target, prop, receiver) {
        if (prop === 'calc') {
            return new Proxy(fun, {
                apply(target, thisArg, argArray) {
                    return Reflect.apply(target, thisArg, argArray)
                }
            })
        } else {
            return Reflect.get(target, prop, receiver)
        }
    }
})

Tests:

Function invocation
fun(10)
Proxy with apply
proxyWithApply(10)
Proxy with Reflect
proxyWithReflect(10)
Object method
obj.calc(10)
Object With Patched emthod
objWithPatch.calc(10)
Object with proxy proxy
objWithProxy.calc(10)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Function invocation
Proxy with apply
Proxy with Reflect
Object method
Object With Patched emthod
Object with proxy proxy

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 15 hours ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark provided is designed to test various approaches to invoking a JavaScript function using proxy objects, specifically focusing on the performance differences between standard function invocation, proxies that use the `apply` method versus the `Reflect.apply` method, and method invocation on objects.

### Breakdown of the Benchmark Options:

1. **Standard Function Invocation**
   - **Test Case**: `fun(10)`
   - **Description**: The simplest form of function invocation where a function named `fun` is directly called with an argument of `10`.
   - **Performance**: This should yield the highest performance since it has the least overhead.

2. **Proxy with `apply` Method**
   - **Test Case**: `proxyWithApply(10)`
   - **Description**: Here, the function is invoked through a proxy that overrides the `apply` trap, forwarding the call to the original function using the standard `Function.prototype.apply` method.
   - **Pros**: Allows control over function invocation, potentially useful for logging or modifying arguments. 
   - **Cons**: Introduces some overhead due to the additional call structure.

3. **Proxy with `Reflect.apply`**
   - **Test Case**: `proxyWithReflect(10)`
   - **Description**: Similar to the previous proxy, but it uses the `Reflect.apply` method to invoke the original function.
   - **Pros**: `Reflect.apply` simplifies calling the original function and automatically handles some cases (like applying the context and arguments correctly).
   - **Cons**: Still incurs overhead compared to direct function calls, but may be slightly more efficient than the previous proxy due to optimizations in the Reflect API.

4. **Object Method Invocation**
   - **Test Case**: `obj.calc(10)`
   - **Description**: This tests calling a method defined on an object `obj` that references the original function `fun`.
   - **Performance**: Comparable to direct function invocation but may have slight overhead due to property access.

5. **Object with Patched Method**
   - **Test Case**: `objWithPatch.calc(10)`
   - **Description**: This tests invoking a method that has been patched with a proxy using the `apply` method.
   - **Pros**: Similar benefits and flexibility as using proxies. 
   - **Cons**: Adds performance overhead over a normal function call.

6. **Object with Proxy Proxy**
   - **Test Case**: `objWithProxy.calc(10)`
   - **Description**: This case creates a nested proxy, which introduces additional complexity and potential performance costs due to multiple layers of proxies.
   - **Cons**: Likely to incur the highest overhead because of the additional handling introduced by the nested proxy.

### Comparison of Results:

- **Executions per Second**: From the benchmark results, we observe that direct function invocation yields the highest performance, followed closely by the object method invocation. The performance with proxies (both `apply` and `Reflect.apply`) shows reduced execution rates, with `Reflect.apply` performing slightly better than the `apply` method.
- **Performance Gaps**: There is a noticeable drop in performance with the "Object with proxy proxy" test case, indicating that additional layers of proxies significantly impact performance.

### Other Considerations:

- **Use Cases**: While proxies can be powerful for certain use cases, such as logging, validation, or argument modification, they introduce complexity and can affect performance. It's essential to evaluate when to use them based on the application's requirements.
- **Alternatives**: For cases where modifying behavior is necessary without the overhead of proxies, function decorators or higher-order functions could be alternatives depending on the use case. Additionally, directly modifying methods may be easier and more performant than wrapping them in proxies unless dynamic behavior is needed.

### Conclusion:

This benchmark serves as a valuable reference for developers to understand the trade-offs involved in using JavaScript proxies for function invocation. While they offer flexibility and potential for advanced use cases, the added performance cost should always be considered in performance-sensitive applications.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 17 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Function invocation	15061514.0 Ops/sec
Proxy with apply	11243432.0 Ops/sec
Proxy with Reflect	11376991.0 Ops/sec
Object method	14901847.0 Ops/sec
Object With Patched emthod	10851744.0 Ops/sec
Object with proxy proxy	8986416.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Proxy function invocation - apply vs reflect (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Function invocation vs Proxy with apply vs Proxy with Reflect vs Object method vs Object With Patched emthod vs Object with proxy proxy

Created: 17 hours ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Function invocation

Proxy with apply

Proxy with Reflect

Object method

Object With Patched emthod

Object with proxy proxy

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 15 hours ago):