Benchmark: Get arguments vs make object

HTML Preparation code:

<script>
    console.log('');

    function vdom1(type, props, children, dom, key, tag) {
        return arguments
    }

    const vdom2 = (type, props, children, dom, key, tag) => {
        return {
            type,
            props,
            children,
            dom,
            key,
            tag
        }
    }
</script>

Script Preparation code:

var arr = ['', '', ''];

Tests:

arguments
vdom1('div', {}, [], null, null, undefined)
arrow
vdom2('div', {}, [], null, null, undefined)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
arguments
arrow

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.

I'll explain the benchmark and its results in detail.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a microbenchmark on MeasurThat.net, which is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: using the `arguments` object (function signature syntax) versus using an arrow function (functional syntax).

**What is tested?**

The benchmark tests how quickly each approach can execute. Specifically:

* **Arguments approach**: The test case creates a simple function named `vdom1`, which takes six arguments (`type`, `props`, `children`, `dom`, `key`, and `tag`). The function simply returns the `arguments` object.
* **Arrow function approach**: The test case creates another simple function named `vdom2`, which is also equivalent to the first one. However, this time, it uses an arrow function syntax instead of a traditional function declaration.

**Options compared**

The two approaches being tested are:

1. Using the `arguments` object (function signature syntax)
2. Using an arrow function (functional syntax)

These two approaches differ in how they define and call functions. In traditional JavaScript, when you write a function, it's declared using the `function` keyword, like this: `var vdom1 = function(type, props, children, dom, key, tag) { ... }`. The `arguments` object is passed implicitly by default.

In contrast, arrow functions are a shorthand syntax introduced in modern JavaScript (ECMAScript 2015). When you write an arrow function, you don't need to use the `function` keyword; instead, you can simply define it with parentheses and the parameter list: `const vdom2 = (type, props, children, dom, key, tag) => { ... }`.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

* **Arguments approach**:
	+ Pros: Easy to write and understand for beginners.
	+ Cons: Can lead to "argument pollution" if you pass too many arguments (i.e., the `arguments` object can become cluttered).
* **Arrow function approach**:
	+ Pros: More concise, expressive, and flexible than traditional functions. Also, fewer variables are scoped.
	+ Cons: Less compatible with older browsers or environments that don't support arrow functions.

**Library usage**

In this benchmark, neither library is explicitly used. However, the `console.log` statements in the HTML preparation code suggest that some sort of logging framework might be involved (although it's not relevant to the performance comparison).

**Special JavaScript features**

The test case uses arrow function syntax (`const vdom2 = (type, props, children, dom, key, tag) => { ... }`), which is a modern feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015. This syntax allows for more concise and expressive function definitions.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to compare the performance of other approaches, some possible alternatives could include:

* Using a traditional function declaration instead of an arrow function
* Adding unnecessary complexity (e.g., using a library like jQuery) to see if it affects performance
* Comparing different language-specific features or syntaxes (e.g., C# vs. JavaScript)
* Investigating the impact of other variables, such as environment-dependent factors (e.g., browser cache), hardware specifics, or even compiler optimizations.

Keep in mind that this benchmark focuses specifically on function signature and syntax differences between two approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Get arguments vs make object (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: arguments vs arrow

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

arguments

arrow

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):