Benchmark: Object.assign performance

Tests:

Using the spread operator
const firstObject = { sampleData: 'Hello world' } const secondObject = { moreData: 'foo bar' } const finalObject = { ...firstObject, ...secondObject };
Using Object.assign
const firstObject = { sampleData: 'Hello world' } const secondObject = { moreData: 'foo bar' } const finalObject = Object.assign(firstObject, secondObject);
Using for loop
const firstObject = { sampleData: 'Hello world' } const secondObject = { moreData: 'foo bar' } for (const key in secondObject) { firstObject[key] = secondObject[key]; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Using the spread operator
Using Object.assign
Using for loop

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 JSON represents a JavaScript benchmark that measures the performance of three different methods for merging two objects: using the spread operator (`...`), `Object.assign()`, and a traditional `for loop`.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the execution speed of these three methods, which are:

1. **Using the spread operator**: This method uses the syntax `{ ...firstObject, ...secondObject }` to merge the two objects.
2. **Using Object.assign()**: This method uses the `Object.assign()` function to merge the two objects.
3. **Using a traditional for loop**: This method uses a `for` loop to iterate over the properties of the second object and assign them to the first object.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Using the spread operator**:
	+ Pros: Concise, readable, and modern syntax.
	+ Cons: May not be supported in older browsers or JavaScript environments.
* **Using Object.assign()**:
	+ Pros: Wide support across browsers and JavaScript versions, easy to use.
	+ Cons: Can be slower than other methods due to the function call overhead.
* **Using a traditional for loop**:
	+ Pros: Well-known and widely supported, no additional functions needed.
	+ Cons: Less readable and more verbose compared to other methods.

**Library Used**

None of these methods rely on any external libraries. The `Object.assign()` method is a built-in JavaScript function, while the spread operator and traditional for loop are native syntax features.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The spread operator (`...`) is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2018 (ES2018). It allows for concise object merging and spreading. While not explicitly mentioned as "special" or "new", it's worth noting that this benchmark tests the performance of this relatively new syntax.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to test other methods, some alternatives could include:

* Using `Array.prototype.reduce()` instead of `Object.assign()`.
* Using a library like Lodash (e.g., `_.merge()`) for merging objects.
* Using a functional programming approach with `reduce()` or `forEach()`.

However, these alternatives are not part of the original benchmark and would require additional modifications to the test cases.

Related benchmarks:

Object.assign performance (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Using the spread operator vs Using Object.assign vs Using for loop

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Using the spread operator

Using Object.assign

Using for loop

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):