Benchmark: dot (.) vs destructure

Script Preparation code:

var object = {
    data: {
        1: {
            2: {
                3: 4
            }
        }
    },
};

Tests:

dot
const data = object.data;
destructure
const { data } = object;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
dot
destructure

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/134.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 134 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
dot	215595744.0 Ops/sec
destructure	217903488.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches for accessing nested data in JavaScript: using the dot notation (`.`) versus destructuring an object (`{ ... }`).

**Test Cases**

There are only two test cases:

1. **"dot"`**: Tests accessing a deeply nested value using the dot notation.
```javascript
const data = object.data;
```
2. **"destructure"`**: Tests accessing a deeply nested value using destructuring an object.
```javascript
const { data } = object;
```
**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing two options:

1. **Dot Notation (`.`)**: This approach involves using the dot notation to access nested properties of an object.
2. **Destructuring an Object (`{ ... }`)**: This approach involves destructuring an object to extract values, including deeply nested ones.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Dot Notation (`.`)**:
	+ Pros:
		- More readable for simple, shallow access.
		- Often preferred by JavaScript veterans.
	+ Cons:
		- Can be verbose and cumbersome for deeply nested data.
		- May lead to typos or errors if not used carefully.
* **Destructuring an Object (`{ ... }`)**:
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and efficient for accessing deeply nested values.
		- Reduces the likelihood of typos or errors.
	+ Cons:
		- Less readable for simple, shallow access.
		- May require more memory to store intermediate results.

**Library**

None are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. However, destructuring an object may implicitly rely on various libraries or built-in functions (e.g., `Object.assign()`, `Array.prototype.reduce()`).

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

Neither test case uses any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard dot notation and destructuring.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark seems to focus primarily on the performance differences between these two approaches. However, other factors like memory usage, readability, and maintainability might also be worth considering in a real-world scenario.

**Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches for accessing nested data in JavaScript include:

1. **`Array.prototype.reduce()`**: This method can be used to iterate over objects and extract values.
```javascript
const result = object.data.reduce((acc, value) => {
  // ...
}, {});
```
2. **`Object.keys()`** and **`forEach()`**: Another way to access nested data using an array of keys.
```javascript
const keys = Object.keys(object);
const result = [];
keys.forEach(key => {
  // ...
});
```
These alternatives might be more suitable for specific use cases, but they come with their own trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and maintainability.

Related benchmarks:

dot (.) vs destructure (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: dot vs destructure

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

dot

destructure

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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