Benchmark: eval vs strict Function vs Function vs bare

Tests:

eval
var data = eval('({a: 2 * 3,now: new Date(12345)})');
Stricct new Function
var data = (new Function('"use strict";return {a: 2 * 3,now: new Date(12345)}'))();
not strict test
var data = (new Function('return {a: 2 * 3,now: new Date(12345)}'))();
bare
var data = (()=>({a: 2 * 3,now: new Date(12345)}))();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
eval
Stricct new Function
not strict test
bare

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided benchmark definition is quite simple. It defines a set of test cases that compare different approaches to executing a small piece of code. The main difference between these approaches lies in how they handle the execution of JavaScript functions and literals.

The options being compared are:

1. **eval**: This function parses the expression passed to this method and executes JavaScript code contained within it.
2. **strict Function** (also known as `new Function('...')`): This is a way to create a new function without using the `Function` constructor. The `'use strict'` clause is executed at the beginning of the function body, which can have implications for its behavior and performance.
3. **not strict test** (also known as `new Function()` without the `'use strict'` clause): This option creates a new function without any special clauses or modifications to the function's execution environment.
4. **bare**: This option uses an immediately invoked function expression (IIFE) wrapped in parentheses, like this: `(() => { ... })()`. This approach is often used to create functions that can be called multiple times without re-creating them.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **eval**:
	* Pros: Can execute arbitrary JavaScript code, flexible.
	* Cons: Performance-heavy, security risks due to the lack of sandboxing.
2. **strict Function** (new Function('...')):
	* Pros: Provides some level of protection against common mistakes and can be faster than `eval`.
	* Cons: Still a way to execute arbitrary JavaScript code, albeit with more restrictions on certain aspects.
3. **not strict test** (new Function()):
	* Pros: Execution speed similar to `strict Function`, less secure than `eval`.
	* Cons: Can lead to security issues if not used carefully.
4. **bare** (IIFE):
	* Pros: More efficient, can be sandboxed for added security, allows reuse without re-creation.
	* Cons: May be slower due to the creation of a new function and its execution.

**Library Use**

There are no explicit libraries mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, some libraries might be implicitly used or required by the browsers running these tests. For example:

* Chrome's JavaScript engine uses the V8 engine, which has its own implementation of `Function` constructors.
* Safari's JavaScript engine is based on WebKit, which also supports `Function` constructors.

**JavaScript Features**

The benchmark doesn't explicitly mention any special JavaScript features or syntax. However, some modern JavaScript engines like V8 (used by Chrome) and SpiderMonkey (used by Firefox) do have experimental features that might affect the performance of these tests.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to explore alternative approaches, you could consider:

* Using a dedicated Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler for JavaScript, such as GraalVM or JavaScriptCore.
* Creating a custom JavaScript engine or interpreter with specific optimizations for your use case.
* Using libraries like WebAssembly or WASM2, which allow compilation of code to machine code and provide better performance.

In conclusion, the MeasureThat.net benchmark provides a useful comparison of different JavaScript execution approaches. While there are some security concerns associated with these methods, understanding their pros and cons can help you make informed decisions about when to use each approach in your own projects.

Related benchmarks:

eval vs strict Function vs Function vs bare (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: eval vs Stricct new Function vs not strict test vs bare

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

eval

Stricct new Function

not strict test

bare

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):