Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
Object.assign vs Polyfill
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
Comparing performance of:
Object.assign vs Polyfill
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
Object.assign
Object.assign(document.createElement("div"), { className: "ActionBox" });
Polyfill
var div = document.createElement("div"); var options = {className: "ActionBox"}; for (const key in options) { div[key] = options[key]; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Object.assign
Polyfill
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 135 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=603868" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Polyfill
1.0M/s
Object.assign
848K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Polyfill
1,016,173 Ops/sec
Object.assign
847,574 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested. **What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents two test cases that compare the performance of `Object.assign()` with a polyfill (a work-around for older browsers) when used to assign properties to an HTML element. **Options compared:** 1. **`Object.assign()`**: A built-in JavaScript method that assigns properties from one or more source objects to a target object. 2. **Polyfill**: A custom implementation of the `Object.assign()` method, likely for use in older browsers that don't support the original `Object.assign()` method. **Pros and cons:** 1. **`Object.assign()`**: * Pros: + Built-in, widely supported, and optimized by most JavaScript engines. + Typically faster than a custom polyfill. * Cons: + May not work in older browsers that don't support the original `Object.assign()` method. 2. **Polyfill**: * Pros: + Works in older browsers that don't support the original `Object.assign()` method. * Cons: + Typically slower than a built-in implementation like `Object.assign()`. + May require additional overhead for browser checks and polyfill implementation. **Library usage:** In this benchmark, no libraries are used. However, it's worth noting that some browsers may have their own implementations of the `Object.assign()` method or similar functionality. **Special JS feature or syntax:** None mentioned in the provided information. **Benchmark preparation code:** The script preparation code is empty, suggesting that the test relies solely on the browser's built-in behavior for `Object.assign()`. The HTML preparation code is also empty, implying that the focus is on comparing the performance of the two options without additional overhead from the DOM. **Other alternatives:** Alternative approaches to testing `Object.assign()` might include: 1. Using a different property assignment method, such as `assign()` (if supported) or a custom implementation. 2. Comparing with other methods for assigning properties to an object, like `forEach()` or `for...in`. 3. Testing the performance of `Object.assign()` in different scenarios, such as: * Assigning large amounts of data. * Using nested objects. * Handling edge cases (e.g., assigning null or undefined values). Keep in mind that these alternatives would require additional test case definitions and modifications to the benchmark framework.
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?