Benchmark: Manually join two objects vs Object.assign.

Script Preparation code:

base = {
	asdsA: 'dasdsa',
	dsad: 434534,
	hji: 'asdsa',
};

second = {
	thing: 'hey'
};

createCopy = (base, other) => {
	return {
  	asdsA: base.asdsA,
    dsad: base.dsad,
    hji: base.hji,
    thing: other.thing,
  };
};

Tests:

Simple Assign
Object.assign({}, base)
Assign joining 2 objects
Object.assign({}, base, second);
Manually joining 2 objects
createCopy(base, second);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Simple Assign
Assign joining 2 objects
Manually joining 2 objects

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.

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

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing three different approaches to join two objects: `Object.assign` with an empty object (`Simple Assign`), `Object.assign` with another object (`Assign joining 2 objects`), and a custom function (`createCopy`) that manually joins the two objects.

**Options being compared**

1. **Simple Assign (Object.assign({}, base))**: This approach uses the spread operator to create a new copy of the `base` object and then assigns the second object (`second`) to it.
2. **Assign joining 2 objects (Object.assign({}, base, second))**: This approach also uses the spread operator, but assigns both `base` and `second` objects to a new object.
3. **Manually joining 2 objects (createCopy(base, second))**: This approach defines a custom function (`createCopy`) that takes two objects as input, creates a new object with properties from the first object, and then adds properties from the second object.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Simple Assign (Object.assign({}, base))**:
	+ Pros: Simple and concise syntax.
	+ Cons: Creates a shallow copy of `base` and only assigns properties from `second`.
* **Assign joining 2 objects (Object.assign({}, base, second))**:
	+ Pros: Ensures that both `base` and `second` are joined into a single object.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the additional assignment operation.
* **Manually joining 2 objects (createCopy(base, second))**:
	+ Pros: More control over the joining process and can handle nested objects.
	+ Cons: Requires defining a custom function, which may add overhead.

**Libraries and special JS features**

None of the options rely on external libraries. However, note that `Object.assign` is a built-in JavaScript method.

No special JS features are required for this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to test other approaches, you could consider:

* Using `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(base))` with `second` instead of `Object.assign`.
* Comparing the performance of using `const` vs. `var` or `let` for variable declarations.
* Testing the performance of using different array or object types (e.g., `ArrayBuffer`, `TypedArray`) when joining objects.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark definition and test cases, but could provide additional insights into JavaScript performance.

Related benchmarks:

Manually join two objects vs Object.assign. (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Simple Assign vs Assign joining 2 objects vs Manually joining 2 objects

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Simple Assign

Assign joining 2 objects

Manually joining 2 objects

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):