Benchmark: Explicit call vs apply

Script Preparation code:

function wrap(fn) {
  // fast path if arity < 4, slow path if not
  switch (fn.length) {
    case 0:
      return function() {
        return fn.call(this)
      }
    case 1:
      return function() {
        return fn.call(this, this)
      }
    case 2:
      return function(a1) {
        return fn.call(this, this, a1)
      }
    case 3:
      return function(a1, a2) {
        return fn.call(this, this, a1, a2)
      }
    case 4:
      return function(a1, a2, a3) {
        return fn.call(this, this, a1, a2, a3)
      }
    default:
      return function() {
        const args = [this]
        for (let i = 0, len = arguments.length; i < len; i++) {
          args[i + 1] = arguments[i]
        }
        return fn.apply(this, args)
      }
  }
}

var counter = 0

var f0 = wrap(function() { return counter++ })
var f1 = wrap(function(a) { return (counter += a) })
var f2 = wrap(function(a, b) { return (counter += (a + b)) })
var f3 = wrap(function(a, b, c) { return (counter += (a + b + c)) })
var f4 = wrap(function(a, b, c, d) { return (counter += (a + b + c + d)) })
var f5 = wrap(function(a, b, c, d, e) { return (counter += (a + b + c + d + e)) })

Tests:

With 0 parameter
f0()
With 1 parameter
f1(Date.now)
With 2 parameters
f2(Date.now, Date.now + 1)
With 3 parameters
f3(Date.now, Date.now + 1, Date.now + 2)
With 4 parameters
f4(Date.now, Date.now + 1, Date.now + 2, Date.now + 3)
With 5 parameters
f5(Date.now, Date.now + 1, Date.now + 2, Date.now + 3, Date.now + 4)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
With 0 parameter
With 1 parameter
With 2 parameters
With 3 parameters
With 4 parameters
With 5 parameters

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 what's being tested in the provided JSON.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance of JavaScript functions with different numbers of arguments using two approaches:

1. `wrap` function: This is a custom wrapper function created by MeasureThat.net to handle the creation and execution of the benchmarked functions.
2. Built-in `apply()` method or direct function invocation (`fn()`, `f0()`, etc.).

**Options being compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of:

* Direct function invocation (`fn()`)
* Using the `apply()` method (`fn.apply(this)`)
* The custom `wrap` function with different numbers of arguments (from 0 to 5)

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Direct function invocation (`fn()`)**
	* Pros:
		+ Simple and efficient
		+ Fast execution
	* Cons:
		+ May not work correctly for functions with a variable number of arguments
2. **Using the `apply()` method (`fn.apply(this)`)**
	* Pros:
		+ Flexible and can handle functions with a variable number of arguments
		+ Can be used to call functions in different contexts
	* Cons:
		+ May have performance overhead due to the additional indirection
3. **Custom `wrap` function**
	* Pros:
		+ Provides a flexible way to handle functions with a variable number of arguments
		+ Allows for fine-grained control over function execution and argument handling
	* Cons:
		+ More complex implementation
		+ May have performance overhead due to the additional indirection

**Special considerations**

The benchmark uses some special JavaScript features, such as:

* `Date.now` to create a timestamp value that can be passed as an argument
* The `with` statement is not used in this case, but it's worth noting that it can be used to create a new scope and execute code within it.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in alternative approaches for handling functions with a variable number of arguments, some options include:

* Using a library like Lodash or Ramda to provide utility functions for working with functions and arrays
* Implementing your own function with a variable number of arguments using techniques like currying or function composition
* Using JavaScript generators or async/await syntax to create asynchronous functions that can handle a variable number of arguments.

Keep in mind that the performance characteristics of each approach may vary depending on the specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

Explicit call vs apply (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: With 0 parameter vs With 1 parameter vs With 2 parameters vs With 3 parameters vs With 4 parameters vs With 5 parameters

Created: 9 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

With 0 parameter

With 1 parameter

With 2 parameters

With 3 parameters

With 4 parameters

With 5 parameters

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):