Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
function over header
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
spead vs func
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
const lol = { hej: 'hej' }
Tests:
spead
const lol = { hej: 'hej' } const hej1={...lol}
func
const lol = { hej: 'hej' } const lolman = ()=>lol const hej2 ={...lolman}
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
spead
func
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! **Benchmark Overview** The provided JSON represents a benchmark for measuring the performance difference between two approaches: spreading an object directly (`const hej1={...lol}`) versus using a function to create a new object with the same properties (`const lolman = ()=>lol` and then `const hej2 ={...lolman}`). **Options Compared** There are two main options being compared: 1. **Direct Spreading**: Using the spread operator (`{...lol}`) to create a new object with all the properties of `lol`. 2. **Function-based Creation**: Creating a new function that returns the original object (`const lolman = ()=>lol`) and then spreading its result to create a new object. **Pros and Cons** 1. **Direct Spreading**: * Pros: Efficient, concise, and easy to read. * Cons: May not be as flexible or reusable, as it only works with objects that can be spread (i.e., objects with enumerable properties). 2. **Function-based Creation**: * Pros: More flexible and reusable, as functions can be used to create new objects with arbitrary logic. * Cons: Less efficient, as a function is created and then executed to produce the result. **Library** There doesn't seem to be any external library being used in this benchmark. The tests are self-contained JavaScript code snippets. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The tests don't use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would affect their performance. However, it's worth noting that using spread operators (`{...}`) is a relatively recent feature (introduced in ES6) and may not be supported in older browsers or environments. **Other Alternatives** For this specific benchmark, the two main alternatives are: 1. **Using the `Object.assign()` method**: This would involve creating an object literal with `lol` as its value and then passing it to `Object.assign()`. However, `Object.assign()` has performance overhead due to its dynamic nature. 2. **Using a library like Lodash** (although not explicitly mentioned in this benchmark): Lodash provides utility functions for working with objects, including `_.assign()` which could be used to create a new object from another. In conclusion, the provided benchmark is designed to measure the performance difference between two approaches to creating new objects: direct spreading and function-based creation. The test results will help developers understand the trade-offs between these approaches in terms of efficiency and flexibility.
Related benchmarks:
lodash omit vs. spread omit
Lodash get vs deconstruction
Benchmarking Lodash get vs babel optional chaining and babel nullish-coalescing operator - ver1
Spread Operator vs. Lodash for POJO
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?