Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
HelloDDDDAA
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Using the spread operator vs Using Object.assign
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var sharedInfo = { chromecastVersion: 'cafReceiver', activeTrackIds: [], tracks: [], mediaInfo: null, errors: [], availabilityStartTime: undefined, accessToken: null, authorizationKey: null, entitlementToken: null, senderDeviceId: null, initialAudioTrackLanguage: '', initialTextTrackLanguage: '', viewableId: null, playableId: null, isLive: false, isStarted: false, isPlaying: false, isSeeking: false, isBuffering: false, isPlayingDaiAds: false, currentTime: 0, volume: 0, duration: 0, playSession: null, viewable: {}, preflight: { playlistDuration: 0, playlist: null, mediaTailor: null, license: null, headers: null, }, startLivePoint: {}, sar: '1:1', }; var volumeUpdate = { volume:1, duration:2, }
Tests:
Using the spread operator
const finalObject = { ...sharedInfo, ...volumeUpdate };
Using Object.assign
const finalObject = Object.assign(sharedInfo, volumeUpdate);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Using the spread operator
Using Object.assign
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and considered. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is comparing two approaches to merge an object with another using JavaScript: 1. **Using the spread operator**: `const finalObject = {...sharedInfo, ...volumeUpdate};` 2. **Using Object.assign**: `const finalObject = Object.assign(sharedInfo, volumeUpdate);` Both approaches aim to create a new object by combining `sharedInfo` and `volumeUpdate`. The difference lies in how they handle the merging process. **Options Compared** The two options are compared in terms of: 1. **Performance**: Measured in executions per second (FPS). 2. **Browser/Device Platform**: The benchmark is run on a Chrome 88 browser on a Windows desktop. 3. **Language Features**: Neither option explicitly uses any special JavaScript features or syntax. **Pros and Cons** 1. **Using the spread operator (`...`)**: * Pros: Often considered more readable and concise, as it clearly expresses the intention of merging two objects. * Cons: Can be slower due to the need for dynamic property creation at runtime. 2. **Using Object.assign**: * Pros: Generally faster than the spread operator, as it uses a built-in method optimized for performance. * Cons: May be less readable and more verbose, requiring explicit reference to the `Object` global object. **Library and Purpose** In this benchmark, no libraries are explicitly mentioned or used. The only notable mention is of the Chrome browser's UA string (User-Agent), which indicates the browser's version and platform. **Special JS Features/Syntax** Neither option explicitly uses any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's built-in to the language. **Other Alternatives** If you were to explore alternative approaches, some options might include: * Using a library like Lodash (e.g., `_.merge(sharedInfo, volumeUpdate)`). * Implementing a custom merging function. * Using a different data structure, such as an array or a class, to represent the objects being merged. Keep in mind that these alternatives may not directly address the performance trade-off between using the spread operator and Object.assign, but rather offer alternative solutions for achieving similar results.
Related benchmarks:
geaegaegaefeafefafaeafafea
nullish tests
type coercion
Compare comparison with null or undefined. With typeof
Compare comparison with null or undefined (updated)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?