Benchmark: object. Assign 2 vs 3 objs

Tests:

object.assign 2 objs
var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my', d: 'ss' }; var b = { c: 'goddess', d: 's2s' }; var c = Object.assign(a, b); console.log(c)
object. Assign 3 objs
var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my', d: 'ss' }; var b = { c: 'goddess', d: 's2s' }; var c = Object.assign({}, a, b); console.log(c)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
object.assign 2 objs
object. Assign 3 objs

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.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and its test cases.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is testing two different approaches for assigning objects in JavaScript, specifically using the `Object.assign()` method. The test cases compare the performance of these methods on assigning one and three objects at a time.

**Options compared:**

There are two options being compared:

1. Assigning only two objects (`object.assign 2 objs`): This approach takes advantage of the fact that `Object.assign()` can take multiple source objects as arguments, allowing it to perform a single operation instead of calling itself recursively.
2. Assigning three objects (`object.assign 3 objs`): In this case, `Object.assign()` is called with three separate source objects, leading to an additional function call.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Assigning only two objects (object.assign 2 objs)**:
	+ Pros:
		- Faster execution time due to reduced number of function calls.
		- More efficient use of resources.
	+ Cons:
		- May not work correctly if the source objects are not in the correct order, which can lead to unexpected results or errors.
* **Assigning three objects (object.assign 3 objs)**:
	+ Pros:
		- Works correctly regardless of the order of the source objects.
	+ Cons:
		- Slower execution time due to increased number of function calls.

**Other considerations:**

When using `Object.assign()`, it's essential to note that the order of the source objects matters. If you want to assign properties from multiple sources in a specific order, use the spread operator (`{...a, ...b}`) instead, which preserves the order of properties.

Now, let's discuss the libraries and special JavaScript features used in these test cases:

* **Library:** None.
* **Special JavaScript feature:** The `Object.assign()` method is a built-in JavaScript method. However, in older browsers or environments where it's not supported, alternative approaches like `Array.prototype.push()` with multiple elements can be used.

**Other alternatives:**

If you want to avoid using `Object.assign()`, you can achieve similar results using the spread operator (`{...a, ...b}`) for assigning two objects and creating a new object by concatenating three objects:
```javascript
var c = {...a, ...b}; // assign 2 objects
var d = {...a, b, c}; // assign 3 objects
```
Alternatively, you can use the `Array.prototype.push()` method with multiple elements to create an array of assigned properties:
```javascript
Object.assign([], a, b); // assign 2 objects
Object.assign([], a, b, c); // assign 3 objects
```
However, these alternatives may have performance implications and are not as readable or maintainable as using `Object.assign()`.

In summary, the benchmark is testing the performance of two approaches for assigning objects in JavaScript using `Object.assign()`. The first approach assigns only two objects, which can lead to faster execution times but requires careful ordering. The second approach assigns three objects, leading to slower execution times due to additional function calls.

Related benchmarks:

object. Assign 2 vs 3 objs (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: object.assign 2 objs vs object. Assign 3 objs

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

object.assign 2 objs

object. Assign 3 objs

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):