Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
hasOwnProperty speed
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
hasOwnProperty call vs hasOwnProperty regular
Created:
8 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var obj = {}, id; for (let i = 0; i <= 100; i++){ obj['param'+i] = i; } let hasOwnProperty = Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;
Tests:
hasOwnProperty call
for(id in obj) { if(hasOwnProperty.call(obj, id)) {} }
hasOwnProperty regular
for(id in obj) { if(obj.hasOwnProperty(id)) {} }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
hasOwnProperty call
hasOwnProperty regular
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 break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Definition:** The benchmark definition is provided in JSON format, which defines two test cases for measuring the speed of accessing an object property using different approaches. The script preparation code initializes a large object `obj` with 101 properties, each assigned a unique integer value from 0 to 100. **Test Cases:** 1. **hasOwnProperty call**: This test case uses the `hasOwnProperty.call()` method to check if a property exists in an object. Specifically, it loops through the object's properties using a `for...in` loop and checks if each property is present using `hasOwnProperty.call(obj, id)`. 2. **hasOwnProperty regular**: This test case uses the `hasOwnProperty()` method directly on the object to check if a property exists. It also loops through the object's properties using a `for...in` loop and checks if each property is present using `obj.hasOwnProperty(id)`. **Comparison:** The benchmark tests the performance difference between two approaches: * Using `hasOwnProperty.call()`, which takes an additional argument (`this` or `object`) to indicate the object being searched. * Using `hasOwnProperty()` directly on the object, without any additional arguments. **Pros and Cons:** * **hasOwnProperty call**: + Pros: - More explicit and flexible, as it allows for easy testing of different objects. - Can be useful when working with complex object hierarchies or when need to pass an object reference separately. + Cons: - Requires additional function call overhead due to the second argument. * **hasOwnProperty regular**: + Pros: - Faster, as it only requires a single function call without any additional arguments. - More concise and idiomatic in most cases. + Cons: - May be less explicit or flexible than `hasOwnProperty.call()`, especially when working with complex objects. **Library/Additional Features:** There is no library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, the `Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty()` method is used, which is a part of the JavaScript standard library. **Special JS feature/syntax:** None are explicitly mentioned or utilized in this benchmark. **Other Alternatives:** * Other methods for checking property existence, such as using a simple `in` operator (`in` vs. `hasOwnProperty()`) or `typeof obj[id] === 'undefined'`. * Using modern JavaScript features like `Object.hasOwn()` (supporting ES6+ syntax) or arrow functions to simplify the comparison. Keep in mind that these alternatives might have different performance characteristics, and their usage depends on specific use cases and requirements.
Related benchmarks:
undefined vs. hasOwnProperty2
undefined vs. typeof vs. in vs. hasOwnProperty.call()
undefined vs. typeof vs. in vs. Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty
in vs Object.hasOwn vs Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?