Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
method vs proto
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
prototype vs method
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var cls1 = function(){}; cls1.prototype.method = function(val) { return val*val; } cls10 = new cls1() var cls2 = function() { this.method = function(val) { return val*val; } } cls20 = new cls2()
Tests:
prototype
cls10.method(100)
method
cls20.method(100)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
prototype
method
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 benchmark test and explain what's being compared. **Benchmark Definition:** The benchmark is comparing two approaches to defining a method in JavaScript classes: 1. **`cls10.method = function(val) { return val*val; }`**: This approach uses a prototype-based inheritance model, where `cls10` inherits properties from its parent class (in this case, the global object). 2. **`var cls2 = function() { this.method = function(val) { return val*val; } };`**: This approach defines a new class (`cls2`) that has a method (`method`) as part of its own scope. **Comparison:** The test is comparing the performance of these two approaches when executing the `method(100)` call on instances of `cls10` and `cls20`, respectively. **Options compared:** * **Prototype-based inheritance**: Inheritance model where classes inherit properties from their parent class. * **Class-based syntax**: Defining a new class with its own scope, including methods as part of that scope. **Pros and Cons:** * **Prototype-based inheritance**: + Pros: Faster and more efficient, as the method can be inherited directly from the global object without creating an additional layer of indirection. + Cons: Can lead to tighter coupling between classes, making it harder to change or extend the behavior of a class. * **Class-based syntax**: + Pros: Easier to understand and maintain, as each class has its own scope and can be more modular. + Cons: Slower due to the overhead of creating an additional layer of indirection. **Other considerations:** * In modern JavaScript, it's generally recommended to use class-based syntax for defining classes, as it provides a more explicit and readable way to define classes and their behavior. * However, prototype-based inheritance can still be useful in certain situations, such as when working with older browsers or environments that don't support ES6+ classes. **Library:** None mentioned in the benchmark definition. It appears to be a simple JavaScript implementation of the two approaches being compared. **Special JS feature/syntax:** The benchmark uses some older syntax for defining classes and methods (e.g., `cls10.method = function(val) { ... }` instead of `class cls1 { method(val) { return val*val; } }`). This is likely to make the benchmark more relevant to older browsers or environments that don't support ES6+ classes. **Other alternatives:** * Other approaches to defining methods in JavaScript, such as using arrow functions (`cls2.method = (val) => val*val`) or closures (`function createMethod(val) { return function() { return val*val; } }; cls20.createMethod(100)`). * Alternative libraries or frameworks for implementing classes and inheritance, such as Lodash's `funcCurry` method.
Related benchmarks:
Manual clone versus prototype extend
prototype methods vs defined function
function vs class method vs new function method v2
object creation+method lookup: new, object.create, literal+proto
class vs function constructor vs object literal vs __proto__ vs Object.create vs Object.setPrototypeOf
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?