Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Object assing vs underscore assing
(version: 1)
Comparing performance of:
Object assing vs Object extend
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://underscorejs.org/underscore-min.js"></script>
Tests:
Object assing
var params = { b:"hello", c: true, d:7 }; params.d = true;
Object extend
var params = { b:"hello", c: true, d:7 }; _.extend(params, {d:true});
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Object assing
Object extend
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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net. **What is being tested?** The provided benchmark tests two ways to assign values to an object: `var` and underscore's `_` function (specifically, `_extend`). In both test cases, we have an object `params` initialized with some properties (`b`, `c`, `d`) set using `var`. The difference lies in the assignment: 1. **Object assigning** (first test case): `params.d = true;` 2. **Object extending** (second test case): `_extend(params, {d:true});` The goal is to determine which method is faster and more efficient. **Options being compared:** Two main approaches are being compared: 1. **Object assigning**: Using the `var` keyword to set a property on an existing object. 2. **Object extending**: Using the underscore library's `_extend` function to merge two objects, overwriting existing properties. **Pros and cons of each approach:** **Object Assigning (First Test Case):** Pros: * Simple and widely supported * No additional dependencies required Cons: * May not work as expected in certain scenarios (e.g., when dealing with inherited properties) * Can be slower due to the overhead of creating a new object and updating its references **Object Extending (Second Test Case):** Pros: * More flexible and powerful, especially when dealing with complex objects * Often preferred for its readability and maintainability Cons: * Requires additional dependencies (the underscore library) * May have performance implications due to the overhead of function calls and object creation **Other considerations:** * **Browser-specific behavior**: The benchmark may not accurately reflect real-world scenarios, as some browsers may optimize or handle these operations differently. * **Object size**: The size of the object being modified can impact performance. Larger objects might lead to slower performance due to increased memory allocation and garbage collection. * **Platform and version differences**: Results may vary across different operating systems, browser versions, and architectures. **Library usage:** The underscore library is used in the second test case (`Object extend`). The `_extend` function merges two objects, overwriting existing properties. In this context, it's being used to compare the performance of assigning values using the `var` keyword versus using the underscore library's `_extend` function. **Special JS features or syntax:** None mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. **Alternative approaches:** For a similar benchmark, one could consider testing: * Using `Object.assign()` (a built-in method introduced in ECMAScript 2015) * Utilizing modern JavaScript features like `Object.defineProperty()`, `Object.set()` (or other similar methods), or even WebAssembly's memory management Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on the specific requirements and use cases you want to cover. If you have any further questions or would like more information, feel free to ask!
Related benchmarks:
Object comparison
Find: Native vs Underscore 1.13 vs Lodash 4.17
Equals vs underscore vs lodash
underscore isString VS typeof
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?