Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
function vs new function
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
new function vs function (arrow) vs function
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
new function
(new Function('return true'))()
function (arrow)
(()=>true)()
function
(function test(){return true})()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
new function
function (arrow)
function
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 break down what's being tested in the provided JSON benchmark. **Benchmark Purpose** The goal of this benchmark is to compare the performance of three different approaches to creating and executing anonymous functions: 1. Using `new Function()` 2. Using a function expression with an arrow function (`=>` syntax) 3. Using a traditional function declaration (without `new` or arrow syntax) **Options Compared** Here's a brief overview of each option: * **New Function**: `Function()` is used to create a new anonymous function, which is immediately invoked. * **Arrow Function**: The arrow function syntax (`=>`) allows for concise and expressive functions without the need for a traditional function declaration or `new` keyword. * **Traditional Function Declaration**: A standard function declaration with parentheses `()` is used. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** Here are some pros and cons for each approach: * **New Function**: + Pros: Can be used to create complex, one-time-use functions without the need for a separate variable declaration. + Cons: Performance overhead due to the creation of a new function object, which may incur additional memory allocations. * **Arrow Function**: + Pros: Concise and expressive syntax, fewer semicolons required, easier to read, and maintainable code. + Cons: Limited compatibility with older browsers or environments that don't support arrow functions. * **Traditional Function Declaration**: + Pros: Wide browser support, well-established syntax, and easy to understand for developers familiar with traditional function declarations. + Cons: More verbose syntax compared to arrow functions, which may lead to less readable code. **Library Use** None of the test cases use external libraries. However, it's worth noting that some browsers might include additional JavaScript libraries or resources when running these benchmarks. **Special JS Features** There are no special JavaScript features used in this benchmark. **Benchmark Preparation Code and Execution** The provided JSON benchmark definitions outline the specific scripts to be executed for each test case: * `new Function('return true')`: Creates a new anonymous function using `Function()` and immediately invokes it with the argument `'return true'`. * `=>true()`: Defines an arrow function with the expression `true` and immediately invokes it. * `(function test(){return true})()`: Creates a traditional function declaration with a single statement (`test()`) that returns `true`, which is then invoked. **Benchmark Results** The latest benchmark results show the performance metrics for each test case, including: * Raw UA string (User Agent) * Browser name and version * Device platform and operating system * Number of executions per second These results likely indicate the relative performance of each approach across different browsers, devices, and platforms.
Related benchmarks:
eval vs new Function v3
eval vs new Function #2
window.eval function vs new Function1
Noop vs new arrow function calls
eval vs Function()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?