Benchmark: function parameter destructure

Script Preparation code:

function sum(obj) {
	return obj.a + obj.b;
}
function sumDestructure({ a, b }) {
	return a + b;
}

Tests:

object
sum({ a: 5, b: 6 });
destructure
sumDestructure({ a: 5, b: 6 });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
object
destructure

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/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
object	94492440.0 Ops/sec
destructure	96727400.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and its tests.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition contains two scripts:

1. `sum(obj) { ... }`: This function takes an object as an argument and returns the sum of its properties `a` and `b`.
2. `sumDestructure({ a, b }) { ... }`: This function destructures an object with two properties, `a` and `b`, and returns their sum.

**Comparison Options**

The benchmark compares two approaches:

1. **Direct Object Access**: The first script (`sum(obj)`) accesses the object's properties directly using dot notation.
2. **Object Destructuring**: The second script (`sumDestructure({ a, b })`) uses destructuring assignment to extract the values from the object.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Direct Object Access**:
	+ Pros: Typically faster, as it avoids the overhead of creating a new object or array.
	+ Cons: Can be more error-prone if not done correctly, especially when dealing with nested objects or arrays.
* **Object Destructuring**:
	+ Pros: More concise and readable, as it eliminates the need to access properties using dot notation.
	+ Cons: Can be slower due to the overhead of creating a new object or array.

In general, direct object access is preferred for simple cases, while object destructuring is useful when working with complex objects or arrays.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript engines may have internal optimizations or features that could affect the performance of these scripts.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax. The focus is on comparing two basic approaches to accessing object properties.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to test this benchmark, you might consider adding additional variations, such as:

* Using different data structures (e.g., arrays instead of objects)
* Adding nested properties or arrays
* Incorporating more complex logic within the function calls
* Using different JavaScript engines or versions

Keep in mind that introducing new variables or complexities can make it harder to interpret the results and might not accurately represent real-world use cases.

Overall, this benchmark provides a simple and straightforward way to compare two common approaches to accessing object properties in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

function parameter destructure (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: object vs destructure

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

object

destructure

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):