Benchmark: func,call vs direct call + global

Tests:

func.call
function def() { console.log(this); }; function abc() { console.log(this); def.call(this) }; abc.call("hello");
direct call + global
g = "hello" function def() { console.log(g); }; function abc() { console.log(g); def() }; abc();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
func.call
direct call + global

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 benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to accessing a variable `g` inside a function:

1. **Direct Call**: The `abc()` function calls another instance of itself directly, passing the global variable `g`.
2. **Function Call with `this` Context**: The `abc()` function calls the `def()` function and passes the current execution context (`this`) to it.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. Direct call: `abc.call("hello")`
	* This approach involves calling the `abc()` function directly, passing a string argument.
2. Function call with `this` context: `def.call(this)`
	* This approach involves calling the `def()` function and passing the current execution context (`this`) as an argument.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Direct Call**
	* Pros:
		+ Simple to implement
	* Cons:
		+ Can lead to unexpected behavior if not handled carefully (e.g., scope issues, variable shadowing)
2. **Function Call with `this` Context**
	* Pros:
		+ More explicit and controlled way of accessing variables in the current context
	* Cons:
		+ May require additional setup or modifications to work correctly

**Library and Special JS Features**

There is no specific library mentioned, but the use of `function call()` and `this` context implies that JavaScript's built-in functions are being used.

No special JavaScript features are used in this benchmark. It appears to be a straightforward test of two approaches to accessing variables in a functional programming style.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for achieving similar functionality might include:

* Using object-oriented programming (OOP) principles, such as encapsulation and inheritance.
* Employing higher-order functions or currying to create more flexible function calls.
* Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Underscore.js, which provide utility functions for working with variables and context.

Overall, this benchmark provides a simple yet informative test of two approaches to accessing variables in JavaScript, highlighting the importance of careful consideration when choosing how to handle variable scoping and context.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Ubuntu Chromium/75.0.3770.90 Chrome/75.0.3770.90 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chromium 75 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
func.call	32411.5 Ops/sec
direct call + global	30116.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

func,call vs direct call + global (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: func.call vs direct call + global

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

func.call

direct call + global

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):