Benchmark: bind vs inline func

Script Preparation code:

var bind = (fn, ...args1)=> (...args2)=> fn(...args1, ...args2);

var foo_ = (a, b)=> a * b;

var foo1 = (a)=> (b)=> a*b;

var foo2 = (a)=> foo_.bind(undefined, a);

var foo3 = (a)=> bind(foo_, a)

Tests:

inline func
for(var i=0; i!==100; i++) { const ni = foo1(Math.random()); ni(Math.random()); }
bind func
for(var i=0; i!==100; i++) { const ni = foo2(Math.random()); ni(Math.random()); }
custom bind
for(var i=0; i!==100; i++) { const ni = foo3(Math.random()); ni(Math.random()); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
inline func
bind func
custom bind

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Explanation**

The provided benchmark compares the performance of three approaches for handling function references:

1. **Inline Function** (`foo1`): A regular function definition with two anonymous inner functions, `a => b => a * b`.
2. **Bound Function** (`foo2`): The `bind()` method is used to create a new function that has the same behavior as the original `foo_` function but with different arguments.
3. **Custom Bound Function** (`foo3`): A custom implementation of the `bind()` method using an arrow function.

**Options Compared**

* Inline Function vs. Bound Function vs. Custom Bound Function
* Performance differences between these three approaches

**Pros and Cons**

* **Inline Function**: Pros:
	+ Simple to implement.
	+ Does not create a new scope or context.
* Cons:
	+ Can lead to slower performance due to the creation of two anonymous functions.
* **Bound Function** (`foo2`):
	+ Pros:
		- Creates a new function with the same behavior as the original but with different arguments.
		- Uses the `bind()` method, which is widely supported by browsers.
* Cons:
	+ May lead to slower performance due to the creation of a new scope and context.
	+ Requires the `bind()` method, which may not be available in older browsers.
* **Custom Bound Function** (`foo3`):
	+ Pros:
		- Custom implementation allows for fine-tuning the behavior.
		- May be optimized for specific use cases.
	+ Cons:
		- More complex to implement and maintain.
		- May lead to slower performance if not implemented correctly.

**Library and Special JS Features**

* The `bind()` method is a built-in JavaScript function that creates a new function with a given context.
* There are no special JavaScript features used in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Preparation Code Explanation**

The script preparation code defines the three functions:

1. `foo_`: A regular function definition that takes two arguments, `a` and `b`, and returns their product.
2. `foo1`: An inline function with two anonymous inner functions.
3. `foo2`: The bound version of `foo_` using the `bind()` method.
4. `foo3`: A custom implementation of the `bind()` method.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case runs a loop that calls one of the three functions (`foo1`, `foo2`, or `foo3`) with random arguments, measuring the number of executions per second.

The benchmark results show the performance differences between the three approaches on a specific machine running Chrome 87 on Mac OS X 10.15.7.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to handling function references include:

1. **Arrow Functions**: Instead of using anonymous inner functions, arrow functions can be used to create closures.
2. **Function Expressions**: Function expressions can be used to define functions with specific arguments and scope.
3. **Higher-Order Functions**: Higher-order functions, such as `map()` or `filter()`, can be used to manipulate function references.

These alternatives may offer different performance profiles or trade-offs in terms of code complexity and maintainability.

Related benchmarks:

bind vs inline func (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: inline func vs bind func vs custom bind

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

inline func

bind func

custom bind

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):