Benchmark: return chain vs ref again

Script Preparation code:

var SomeThing = (function () {
    function SomeThing() {
        this._value = 1;
    }
    SomeThing.prototype.setValue1 = function (v) {
        this._value = v;
      	return this;
    };
  	SomeThing.prototype.setValue2 = function (v) {
        this._value = v;
    };
    return SomeThing;
}()),
st = new SomeThing();

Tests:

return chain
st.setValue1(2) .setValue1(2) .setValue1(2) .setValue1(2) .setValue1(2) .setValue1(2) .setValue1(2) .setValue1(2) .setValue1(2) .setValue1(2)
reref
st.setValue2(2); st.setValue2(2); st.setValue2(2); st.setValue2(2); st.setValue2(2); st.setValue2(2); st.setValue2(2); st.setValue2(2); st.setValue2(2); st.setValue2(2);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
return chain
reref

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'd be happy to help explain the benchmark.

**Overview**

The provided JSON represents two test cases for a JavaScript microbenchmark. The test cases are designed to measure the performance difference between two approaches: "return chain" and "ref again".

**Return Chain Approach**

In this approach, the `setValue1` method is called with a return value of `this`, which returns the instance itself. This allows for chaining multiple method calls together.

Example:
```javascript
st.setValue1(2) // returns st
  .setValue1(2) // returns st (again)
  ...
```
**Ref Again Approach**

In this approach, a local variable is used to store the return value of `setValue1`, and then another call to `setValue1` with the same variable is made.

Example:
```javascript
st.setValue2(2) // assigns 2 to _value (local var)
st.setValue2(2) // assigns 2 to _value (again, different local var)
```
**Benchmark Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. "return chain" - This case uses the return chain approach, where `setValue1` is called multiple times in a row.
2. "ref again" - This case uses the ref again approach, where a local variable is used to store the return value of `setValue1`, and then another call is made with that variable.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

* **Return Chain Approach**
	+ Pros: Allows for more readable code, can be more efficient in some cases (e.g., when chaining multiple method calls).
	+ Cons: Can lead to performance issues if the return value is expensive to compute.
* **Ref Again Approach**
	+ Pros: Can avoid performance issues related to expensive return values.
	+ Cons: May make code harder to read and understand.

**Library and Special JS Features**

In this benchmark, no external libraries or special JavaScript features are used. The test cases only rely on standard JavaScript syntax.

**Other Alternatives**

If the developers want to explore other approaches, they can consider alternatives such as:

* Using a different method call convention (e.g., using `bind` or `arrow functions`)
* Using a different data structure (e.g., an array or object) instead of a local variable
* Optimizing the code for specific use cases (e.g., caching or memoization)

Keep in mind that these alternatives may require additional testing and analysis to ensure that they provide the desired performance improvements.

Related benchmarks:

return chain vs ref again (version: 0)

desc

Comparing performance of: return chain vs reref

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

return chain

reref

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):