Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Object and no-object speed
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
no-object vs object
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
no-object
class Person { constructor(name, age) { this.name = name, this.age = age } } const ivan = new Person('Ivan', 37)
object
class Person { constructor(settings) { this.name = settings.name, this.age = settings.age } } const ivan = new Person({ name: "Ivan", age: 37 })
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
no-object
object
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):
**What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents two test cases for measuring the performance of JavaScript objects in class constructors. The tests compare the execution speed of creating instances with and without an object literal. **Options compared:** 1. **No-object**: Creating an instance using the `new` keyword, where no object literal is used. ```javascript const ivan = new Person('Ivan', 37); ``` 2. **Object**: Creating an instance using the `new` keyword with an object literal. ```javascript const ivan = new Person({ name: "Ivan", age: 37 }); ``` **Pros and Cons of each approach:** 1. **No-object**: * Pros: May be faster due to less overhead, as no object creation is involved. * Cons: May require more explicit parameter handling, potentially leading to errors if not done correctly. 2. **Object**: * Pros: Easier to read and maintain, as the object literal provides a clear structure for the constructor parameters. * Cons: May be slower due to additional overhead from creating an object. **Other considerations:** 1. Library usage: The `Person` class uses a standard JavaScript syntax for constructors, which is widely supported across browsers and engines. 2. Special JS feature/syntax: None mentioned in the provided code snippets. No special features or syntax are being used that would affect the benchmarking results. 3. Alternatives: * Other approaches could include using ES6 classes with destructuring, or using a different constructor syntax altogether (e.g., using `function Person` instead of `class Person`). * Additionally, other factors like memory allocation, garbage collection, and caching might also impact performance. **Library usage:** The `Person` class uses the standard JavaScript class syntax, which is part of the ECMAScript 2015 specification. This syntax has been widely adopted across modern browsers and engines, making it a suitable choice for benchmarking purposes. **Special JS feature/syntax:** None mentioned in the provided code snippets.
Related benchmarks:
Object literal vs Object.create(null)
Object.create(null) vs Object literal
Object literal vs Object.create(null) v2
Object literal vs Object.create(null) 2
Object literal vs Object.create(null )
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?