Benchmark: function call overhead

HTML Preparation code:

<div id='root'></div>
<script crossorigin src="https://unpkg.com/react@16/umd/react.production.min.js"></script>
<script crossorigin src="https://unpkg.com/react-dom@16/umd/react-dom.production.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}
var root = document.getElementById('root');
var e = React.createElement;

Tests:

function call
const pluralize = (singular, plural, count) => (count === 1 ? singular : plural); let count = getRandomInt(3); ReactDOM.render(e('div',{},pluralize('application', 'applications', count) ), root)
expression
let count = getRandomInt(3);; ReactDOM.render(e('div',{},`application${count > 1 ? 's':''}` ), root)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
function call
expression

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the overhead of function calls in JavaScript. The test case checks the performance difference between calling a function with multiple arguments and calling it without any arguments using an expression.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script prepares a React environment by defining a random integer generator function `getRandomInt` and creating a React root element (`var e = React.createElement;`). This code sets up the stage for the benchmark tests.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code includes a `<div>` element with an ID of "root", which will be used as the target element for the benchmark tests. The script tags load the necessary React and React DOM files from a CDN.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Test Case 1: Function Call**
```javascript
const pluralize = (singular, plural, count) => (count === 1 ? singular : plural);
let count = getRandomInt(3);
ReactDOM.render(e('div',{},pluralize('application', 'applications', count) ), root);
```
This test case calls the `pluralize` function with three arguments: `singular`, `plural`, and `count`. The function returns a string, which is then rendered to the DOM using `ReactDOM.render`.

2. **Test Case 2: Expression**
```javascript
let count = getRandomInt(3);
ReactDOM.render(e('div',{},`application${count > 1 ? 's':''}` ), root);
```
This test case uses an expression to render a string to the DOM. The expression uses template literals to concatenate the string "application" with either "s" or nothing, depending on whether `count` is greater than 1.

**Comparison**

The benchmark compares the execution time of the two test cases:

* **Function Call**: Calls the `pluralize` function with three arguments.
* **Expression**: Uses an expression to render a string to the DOM.

**Pros and Cons**

**Function Call:**

Pros:

* More efficient, as it avoids the overhead of parsing an expression.
* Can be more readable, as the code is more explicit.

Cons:

* May require additional function calls, which can introduce overhead.
* May not be suitable for cases where the function call is unnecessary.

**Expression:**

Pros:

* Can be more concise and expressive, as it avoids the need to define a separate function.
* Can be faster, as the expression is parsed only once.

Cons:

* May be less efficient, as it involves parsing an expression.
* Can be harder to read and maintain, as the code is more complex.

**Other Considerations**

* **Template Literals**: The use of template literals in the Expression test case allows for more concise and expressive code. However, this syntax was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and may not be supported by older browsers or versions of React.
* **Function Overhead**: The benchmark measures the overhead of calling a function with multiple arguments. This can be important in scenarios where functions are called frequently or with large amounts of data.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for measuring JavaScript performance include:

* Using a profiling tool, such as Chrome DevTools or Firefox Developer Edition.
* Writing custom benchmarking scripts using tools like Benchmark.js or micro-benchmark.
* Using a test framework like Jest or Mocha to write and run automated tests.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/122.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/122.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 122 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
function call	484403.1 Ops/sec
expression	481192.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

function call overhead (version: 0)

check function call overhead

Comparing performance of: function call vs expression

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

function call

expression

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):