Benchmark: Data Properties vs. Accessor Properties vs. Getter / Setter Methods 1

Data Properties vs. Accessor Properties vs. Getter / Setter Methods 1 (version: 0)

The purpose of this benchmark is to determine the performance differences between data properties, accessor properties and getters / setter functions.

Comparing performance of: Read from data property vs Write to data property vs Read from accessor method vs Write to mutator method vs Read from object literal property vs Write to object literal property vs Read from object literal property on prototype vs Write to object literal property on prototype vs Write to object vs Read to object

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Script Preparation code:

var data = {
  property: property
};

var property = undefined;

var method = {
  getProperty: function() {
    return property;
  },

  setProperty: function(value) {
    property = value;
  }
};

var objectLiteralAccessor = {
  get property() {
    return property;
  },
  set property(value) {
    property = value;
  }
};

function Class() {
}

Class.prototype = {
  getProperty() {
    return property;
  },
  setProperty(value) {
    property = value;
  },
  get property() {
    return property;
  },
  set property(value) {
    property = value;
  }
};
    
var prototypeAccessor = new Class();

Tests:

Read from data property
var value = data.property;
Write to data property
data.property = true;
Read from accessor method
var value = method.getProperty();
Write to mutator method
method.setProperty(true);
Read from object literal property
var value = objectLiteralAccessor.property;
Write to object literal property
objectLiteralAccessor.property = true;
Read from object literal property on prototype
var value = prototypeAccessor.property;
Write to object literal property on prototype
prototypeAccessor.property = true;
Write to object
var value = prototypeAccessor.getProperty();
Read to object
prototypeAccessor.setProperty(true);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Read from data property
Write to data property
Read from accessor method
Write to mutator method
Read from object literal property
Write to object literal property
Read from object literal property on prototype
Write to object literal property on prototype
Write to object
Read to object

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 what is being tested in this benchmark and the different approaches used.

**Benchmark Purpose:**
The purpose of this benchmark is to compare the performance differences between three approaches to access and modify data properties:

1. **Data Properties**: Directly accessing a property on an object using dot notation (e.g., `data.property`).
2. **Accessor Properties**: Using accessor properties with a getter function that returns the value (e.g., `objectLiteralAccessor.property`) or setter functions to modify the value (e.g., `objectLiteralAccessor.property = true;`).
3. **Getter/Setter Methods**: Creating custom methods on an object to access and modify data using function calls (e.g., `method.getProperty()`).

**Approach Comparison:**

* **Data Properties vs. Accessor Properties**: Both approaches are similar in that they use dot notation to access the property, but accessor properties provide a way to encapsulate the getter and setter logic, which can lead to better performance and security.
* **Accessor Properties vs. Getter/Setter Methods**: Accessor properties are more efficient because they avoid the overhead of function calls. However, getter/setter methods provide more flexibility in terms of logic complexity and error handling.

**Performance Results:**
The benchmark results show that accessor properties outperform data properties due to their ability to cache the property value. This caching reduces the number of times the property is looked up, leading to faster execution. Getter/setter methods are slower than accessor properties because they involve function calls, which add overhead.

**Key Insights:**

* Accessor properties can be a more efficient and secure way to access data in objects.
* Getter/setter methods provide flexibility but come with performance overhead due to function calls.
* Caching property values using accessor properties can significantly improve performance.

Overall, this benchmark highlights the importance of choosing an appropriate approach for accessing and modifying data in objects based on performance and security requirements.

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/84.0.4147.135 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 84 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Read from data property	11944928.0 Ops/sec
Write to data property	11895602.0 Ops/sec
Read from accessor method	5966777.0 Ops/sec
Write to mutator method	4444305.5 Ops/sec
Read from object literal property	5369902.0 Ops/sec
Write to object literal property	2665076.2 Ops/sec
Read from object literal property on prototype	5375312.0 Ops/sec
Write to object literal property on prototype	4341736.0 Ops/sec
Write to object	5721419.5 Ops/sec
Read to object	4266714.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Data Properties vs. Accessor Properties vs. Getter / Setter Methods 1 (version: 0)

The purpose of this benchmark is to determine the performance differences between data properties, accessor properties and getters / setter functions.

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Read from data property

Write to data property

Read from accessor method

Write to mutator method

Read from object literal property

Write to object literal property

Read from object literal property on prototype

Write to object literal property on prototype

Write to object

Read to object

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):