Benchmark: Assignment of value vs Destructuring an object multiple

Tests:

Assign
const attrib = [{foo: { bar: { baz: 'a', biz: 'x'}}}, {foo: { bar: { baz: 'b', biz: 'x'}}}, {foo: { bar: { baz: 'x', biz: 'x'}}}] attrib.find(a => a.foo.bar.baz === 'x' && a.foo.bar.biz === 'x')
Destructure
const attrib = [{foo: { bar: { baz: 'a', biz: 'x'}}}, {foo: { bar: { baz: 'b', biz: 'x'}}}, {foo: { bar: { baz: 'x', biz: 'x'}}}] attrib.find(({foo: {bar: { baz, biz }}}) => baz === 'x' && biz === 'x')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Assign
Destructure

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.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided benchmark, hosted on MeasureThat.net, tests the performance of two approaches to find a specific value in an array of objects: assigning values directly versus destructuring objects.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition JSON contains two test cases:

1. **Assign**: This test case assigns values directly using the `find()` method with a callback function that checks for equality.
2. **Destructure**: This test case uses object destructuring to extract specific properties from an object and then uses the same `find()` method with a new callback function.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares two approaches:

1. **Direct Assignment**: Using the `find()` method with a callback function that assigns values directly.
2. **Object Destructuring**: Using object destructuring to extract specific properties from an object and then using the same `find()` method with a new callback function.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Direct Assignment**:
	+ Pros: Simple, straightforward, and widely supported by most browsers.
	+ Cons: Can lead to slower performance due to the overhead of creating a temporary value for each iteration.
* **Object Destructuring**:
	+ Pros: Can be more efficient, as it avoids creating temporary values and allows for faster lookups using property names instead of values.
	+ Cons: Requires modern JavaScript features (ES6+), which might not be supported by older browsers or environments.

**Library and Special JS Features**

In this benchmark, the `find()` method is used to search for an element in an array. The `find()` method is a standard JavaScript method that is widely supported by most browsers and environments.

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes used in this benchmark beyond ES6+ syntax (object destructuring).

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to explore other alternatives, here are some options:

* **Use a different search algorithm**: Instead of using the `find()` method, you could use a linear search or another algorithm that is optimized for performance.
* **Try alternative data structures**: Consider using arrays, objects, or other data structures that might be more efficient for this type of search.
* **Use a benchmarking library**: Utilize specialized benchmarking libraries like Benchmark.js or jsperf to improve the accuracy and reliability of your benchmark.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided benchmark preparation code is minimal and consists of two scripts:

1. A script that defines an array of objects with specific properties.
2. Two test cases, each defining a different approach (Direct Assignment vs Object Destructuring) using the `find()` method.

These scripts are designed to be simple and straightforward, allowing users to easily reproduce and compare the results of their own benchmarks.

Related benchmarks:

Assignment of value vs Destructuring an object multiple (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Assign vs Destructure

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Assign

Destructure

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):