Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Anonymous Functions Evaluations (IIFE)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Outside of IIFE vs Inside of IIFE
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
Outside of IIFE
const arr = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; i++) { let value; if(i % 10 === 0) value = 1; else value = 0; arr.push(value); }
Inside of IIFE
const arr = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; i++) { arr.push((() => { if(i % 10 === 0) return 1; return 0; })()); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Outside of IIFE
Inside of IIFE
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/136.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 136 on Linux
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=604089" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Outside of IIFE
4.5M/s
Inside of IIFE
1.6M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Outside of IIFE
4,460,289 Ops/sec
Inside of IIFE
1,642,910 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark and its options. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark measures the performance of anonymous functions (IIFEs) in JavaScript, specifically comparing two approaches: evaluating expressions outside and inside an IIFE. **Options Compared** There are two test cases: 1. **Outside of IIFE**: In this approach, the expression is evaluated directly without wrapping it in an IIFE. 2. **Inside of IIFE**: In this approach, the expression is wrapped in an IIFE and then executed using the `()` operator. **Pros and Cons** * **Outside of IIFE**: + Pros: potentially faster execution since there's no overhead from creating a new scope. + Cons: may be vulnerable to timing attacks or other malicious scenarios due to the lack of encapsulation. * **Inside of IIFE**: + Pros: provides better encapsulation and protection against external interference, making it more suitable for security-critical code. + Cons: introduces additional overhead due to the creation of a new scope. **Library and Special JS Feature** Neither of these test cases uses any libraries. However, they do utilize a feature specific to JavaScript called **Immediately Invoked Function Expressions (IIFEs)**, which allows you to execute a function immediately after its definition. In this case, IIFEs are used to wrap the expression being evaluated. **Other Alternatives** If the benchmark were to explore alternative approaches, some possible options could include: * Using a different evaluation strategy, such as **eval()** or **Function()**, which might offer improved performance. * Comparing the performance of compiled and interpreted JavaScript engines (e.g., V8 vs. SpiderMonkey). * Examining the impact of various optimization techniques, such as dead code elimination or constant folding. Keep in mind that these alternative approaches would require significant changes to the benchmark setup and test cases. For a more detailed understanding of the benchmark, you can review the provided JSON files: 1. Benchmark definition: `MeasureThat.net/benchmarks/anonymous-functions-evaluations` 2. Test case preparation code (not shown here) Feel free to ask if you have any further questions or need clarification on specific aspects!
Related benchmarks
Switch vs Functional Approach
bind vs closure v2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?