Benchmark: eval vs new Function

Tests:

eval
var func = eval("(function (){ alert('sweet!')})");
new Function
var func = new Function("return function (){ alert('sweet!')}")();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
eval
new Function

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its options.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark created on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark is defined as `eval vs new Function`, which means it compares the performance of two different approaches: using the `eval()` function and creating a new function with the `new Function` syntax.

**Options Compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **`eval()`**: This function executes a string as JavaScript code, allowing developers to dynamically create and execute functions.
2. **`new Function`**: This syntax creates a new function object and executes it immediately.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

*   `eval()`: Pros:
    *   Dynamically creates functions with variable names or without name.
    *   Can be used for complex calculations or string manipulation.
Cons:
    *   Performance: Evaluating `eval()` can be slower due to the overhead of parsing the string as JavaScript code.
    *   Security: Using `eval()` can pose security risks if used with untrusted input, as it can execute arbitrary code.
*   `new Function`: Pros:
    *   Faster execution: Creating a new function using `new Function` is generally faster than using `eval()`.
    *   Safer: It avoids the security risks associated with `eval()` when working with untrusted input.
Cons:
    *   Limited flexibility: The syntax requires specifying the return type of the function, which can limit its usability.

**Library and Purpose**

There are no libraries mentioned in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that libraries like jQuery or Lodash might be used to create complex functions or manipulate strings, potentially affecting performance.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There is one special feature used in this benchmark:

*   **Immediately Invoked Function Expression (IIFE)**: Both benchmarks use an IIFE (`() => { ... }`) to create the function. This syntax ensures that the code within the function executes immediately, without relying on external function calls.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches for creating functions, consider the following:

*   **Function Expressions**: You can use a simple function expression (`function(){...}`) to create a new function.
*   **Arrow Functions**: Arrow functions (`() => { ... }`) are concise and often preferred for small, single-expression functions.

Here is an example of how you could rewrite the benchmark using these alternatives:

```javascript
// Using a function expression:
var func = (function(){ return 'Hello, World!'; })();
console.log(func); // Output: "Hello, World!"

// Using an arrow function:
var func = () => 'Hello, World!';
console.log(func()); // Output: "Hello, World!"
```

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as efficient or safe as the original `new Function` syntax.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.75 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 86 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
eval	548790.6 Ops/sec
new Function	206053.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

eval vs new Function (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: eval vs new Function

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

eval

new Function

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):