Benchmark: Creating a partial object: destructuring vs. property picking

Tests:

Object destructuring
const obj = { a:1, b:1, c:1, d:1, e:1, f:1, g:1, h:1, i:1, } const {a, d, i} = obj; const n = {a, d, i};
Property picking
const obj = { a:1, b:1, c:1, d:1, e:1, f:1, g:1, h:1, i:1, } const n = {a: obj.a, d: obj.d, i: obj.i};

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Object destructuring
Property picking

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Object destructuring	230114640.0 Ops/sec
Property picking	204251888.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for creating a partial object:

1. **Object Destructuring**: Using the syntax `const {a, d, i} = obj;`, where an object literal `{...}` is used to create a new object with only the specified properties.
2. **Property Picking**: Using the syntax `const n = {a: obj.a, d: obj.d, i: obj.i};`, where each property value is explicitly assigned using dot notation (`obj.property`).

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches:

* **Object Destructuring**: Creating a new object with only the desired properties using destructuring syntax.
* **Property Picking**: Assigning individual property values to create a partial object.

**Pros and Cons**

**Object Destructuring:**

Pros:

* More concise and readable code
* Less boilerplate code

Cons:

* May not be as efficient in older browsers or environments with limited support for modern JavaScript features
* Can lead to unexpected behavior if the order of properties matters (e.g., `const {a, b} = obj; const c = a + b`)

**Property Picking:**

Pros:

* More explicit and controllable code
* May be more efficient in older browsers or environments

Cons:

* Longer and less concise code
* Requires more manual effort to specify each property value

**Other Considerations**

* Both approaches create a new object with only the desired properties, so they should have similar performance characteristics for most modern JavaScript engines.
* The choice between destructuring and property picking ultimately depends on personal preference, coding style, and specific use case requirements.

**Library Usage**

There is no library explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript engines may optimize or provide additional features for object creation and manipulation.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None are mentioned specifically, but keep in mind that modern JavaScript engines often support advanced features like destructuring, arrow functions, and template literals.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to these approaches include:

* Using the `Object.assign()` method to create a partial object.
* Utilizing a library or framework-specific implementation for creating objects (e.g., React's `Partial` type).
* Employing other object creation techniques, such as using the spread operator (`{...obj}`) or the `Object.create()` method.

However, the original benchmark definition primarily focuses on comparing object destructuring and property picking, making these alternatives less relevant.

Related benchmarks:

Creating a partial object: destructuring vs. property picking (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Object destructuring vs Property picking

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Object destructuring

Property picking

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):