Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Access to Proxy vs Object Another one, nother one
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Object access vs Proxy access vs Proxy with get handler access
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Object access
object = { value: 'data' }; object.value = "blah"; object.value;
Proxy access
proxy = new Proxy(object, {}) object.value = "blah"; object.value;
Proxy with get handler access
proxyWithHandler = new Proxy(object, { get(target, prop, receiver) { return target[prop] }, set(target, property, value) { target[property] = value; } }) object.value = "blah"; object.value;
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Object access
Proxy access
Proxy with get handler access
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 dive into the details of this JavaScript microbenchmark. **What is tested?** The benchmark measures the performance differences between three approaches: 1. **Direct object access**: This involves accessing an object's property directly without any intermediaries. 2. **Proxy access**: This involves creating a proxy object that intercepts access to its properties, allowing for customization of the access behavior. 3. **Proxy with get handler access**: This builds upon the proxy approach by adding a custom `get` handler function that allows for fine-grained control over property access. **Options compared** The benchmark compares these three approaches in terms of performance, specifically measuring how many executions per second each method achieves on the same test data. **Pros and cons of each approach:** 1. **Direct object access**: * Pros: Simple, straightforward, and efficient. * Cons: No control over property access behavior; may lead to unintended side effects if not used carefully. 2. **Proxy access**: * Pros: Allows for customization of property access behavior without modifying the original data. * Cons: May introduce additional overhead due to the proxy object creation and management. 3. **Proxy with get handler access**: * Pros: Offers fine-grained control over property access behavior, allowing for optimized access patterns. * Cons: Requires more complex setup and may incur additional overhead due to the custom `get` handler function. **Libraries and their purpose** None of the test cases rely on external libraries. However, the use of proxies is a built-in JavaScript feature that allows for dynamic property inspection and modification. **Special JS features or syntax** No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in this benchmark. The tests focus on demonstrating the performance differences between these three approaches using standard JavaScript programming constructs. **Other alternatives** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options: 1. **Using a different data structure**: Consider using arrays, sets, or other data structures that might offer better performance characteristics for certain use cases. 2. **Implementing custom caching mechanisms**: Explore the use of caching libraries or implementing your own caching mechanism to optimize property access. 3. **Utilizing JIT compilers or transpilers**: Leverage just-in-time (JIT) compilers or transpilers like Babel or Webpack to optimize JavaScript code for specific browsers or environments. Keep in mind that these alternatives might introduce additional complexity and may not necessarily improve performance, depending on the specific use case and requirements.
Related benchmarks:
Access to 2xProxy vs Object
Access to Proxy vs Object - without reflect
Access to Proxy vs new Proxy vs Object
Access to Proxy vs Object vs plain proxy
Access to Proxy vs Object no Reflect
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?