Benchmark: flyweight in javascript

Script Preparation code:

for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {

}

Tests:

Test non flyweight
var candidateNum = 2000 // 考生数量 var examCarNum = 0 // 驾考车的数量 /* 驾考车构造函数 */ function ExamCar(carType) { examCarNum++ this.carId = examCarNum this.carType = carType ? '手动档' : '自动档' } ExamCar.prototype.examine = function(candidateId) { console.log('考生- ' + candidateId + ' 在' + this.carType + '驾考车- ' + this.carId + ' 上考试') } for (var candidateId = 1; candidateId <= candidateNum; candidateId++) { var examCar = new ExamCar(candidateId % 2) examCar.examine(candidateId) }
Test flyweight
var candidateNum = 2000 // 考生数量 var examCarNum = 0 // 驾考车的数量 const map = new Map(); /* 驾考车构造函数 */ function ExamCar(carType) { examCarNum++ this.carId = examCarNum this.carType = carType ? '手动档' : '自动档' } ExamCar.prototype.examine = function(candidateId) { const student = map.get(candidateId); console.log('考生- ' + student.id + ' 在' + this.carType + '驾考车- ' + this.carId + ' 上考试') } var manualExamCar = new ExamCar(true) var autoExamCar = new ExamCar(false) for (var candidateId = 1; candidateId <= candidateNum; candidateId++) { var examCar = candidateId % 2 ? manualExamCar : autoExamCar map.set(candidateId, {id: candidateId}) examCar.examine(candidateId) }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Test non flyweight
Test flyweight

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.

**What is being tested:**

The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches to creating and using an `ExamCar` object:

1. **Non-Flyweight Approach**: The first test case uses a traditional, constructor-based approach to create multiple instances of `ExamCar`. Each instance has its own separate properties (e.g., `carId`, `carType`). This approach creates a new object for each exam candidate.
2. **Flyweight Approach**: The second test case uses a flyweight pattern to create only two instances of `ExamCar` and shares the same properties between them. In this example, one instance is used for even numbers (`manualExamCar`) and another for odd numbers (`autoExamCar`). Both instances share the same `carId` property.

**Options being compared:**

* **Memory allocation**: The non-flyweight approach creates multiple objects with separate properties, while the flyweight approach shares a single object's properties between instances.
* **Performance**: The flyweight approach is expected to be faster since it reduces memory allocation and copying overhead.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

Non-Flyweight Approach:
Pros:

* Easy to implement and understand
* No shared state or concurrency issues

Cons:

* Inefficient use of memory (multiple objects with separate properties)
* Can lead to performance bottlenecks due to excessive object creation and copying

Flyweight Approach:
Pros:

* Efficient use of memory (shared object with separate values)
* Can improve performance by reducing object creation and copying overhead

Cons:

* More complex implementation and shared state can introduce concurrency issues
* May require additional synchronization mechanisms or thread-safe design

**Library and special JS features:**

The benchmark uses the following JavaScript library:

* None explicitly mentioned, but it's likely that the `Map` data structure is used to implement the flyweight pattern.

No special JavaScript features are explicitly mentioned in the provided code snippets.

**Other considerations:**

* The benchmark only tests the performance difference between two approaches and does not consider other factors like maintainability, readability, or scalability.
* The test cases do not account for edge cases, such as an empty `candidateNum` or invalid input values.
* Additional optimizations, like caching or memoization, might be necessary to achieve better performance.

**Alternatives:**

Other approaches to create and use `ExamCar` objects could include:

* Using a factory function instead of constructor-based object creation
* Implementing a singleton pattern for the `ExamCar` class
* Utilizing a caching mechanism to store and reuse created instances
* Employing lazy initialization or delayed binding to reduce unnecessary computations

Keep in mind that these alternatives would depend on specific requirements, performance considerations, and code complexity.

Related benchmarks:

flyweight in javascript (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Test non flyweight vs Test flyweight

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Test non flyweight

Test flyweight

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):