Benchmark: React - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/17.0.2/umd/react.production.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react-dom/17.0.2/umd/react-dom.production.min.js"></script>
<div id="root"></div>

Script Preparation code:

const clickMe = () => {
	console.log('hello world');
}

function InlineTest() {
	return React.createElement('button', {
    	onClick: () => { clickMe() }
  	}, 'Click me!');
}

function ReferenceTest() {
	return React.createElement('button', {
        onClick: clickMe
    }, 'Click me!');
}

Tests:

Inline
ReactDOM.render(React.createElement(InlineTest), document.getElementById('root'))
Reference
ReactDOM.render(React.createElement(ReferenceTest), document.getElementById('root'))

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

Reference

1.3M/s

Inline

1.0M/s

Fastest: Reference (1.3x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Reference: 1,300,849 ops/sec
• Inline: 1,013,395 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Inline
Reference

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/137.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 137 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Reference

1.7M/s

Inline

1.4M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Reference	1,682,657 Ops/sec
Inline	1,354,920 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and analyzed.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark defines two test cases: `Inline` and `Reference`. The scripts are written in JavaScript using the React library.

The script preparation code contains two functions: `InlineTest` and `ReferenceTest`. Both functions create a React element (`button`) with an event handler (onClick) that calls another function `clickMe`.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code includes links to the React and React DOM libraries, which are loaded before running the benchmark. This ensures that the necessary dependencies for the scripts are available.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Inline**: In this test case, the `inline` function is used directly as an argument to the `React.createElement` method.
2. **Reference**: In this test case, a reference to the `clickMe` function is passed as an argument to the `React.createElement` method.

**Comparison**

The comparison between these two approaches can be broken down into pros and cons:

**Inline**

Pros:

* The inline syntax may be more efficient because it eliminates the need for explicit function declarations or references.
* It might lead to better code completion and IDE integration.

Cons:

* The inline syntax may make the code harder to read and maintain, especially for complex functions.
* There's a risk of name collisions if multiple functions with the same name are defined in different scopes.

**Reference**

Pros:

* The reference syntax is more explicit and readable, making it easier to understand the intent of the code.
* It avoids potential issues with name collisions.

Cons:

* The reference syntax may be slower due to the overhead of looking up the function object at runtime.

**Library: React**

React is a JavaScript library for building user interfaces. Its main purpose is to provide a declarative way of rendering components, which are self-contained pieces of UI that can be composed together to form more complex applications.

In this benchmark, React is used as a dependency library, providing the necessary APIs for creating and manipulating DOM elements.

**Special JS feature or syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in the provided code. The focus is on comparing two different approaches to handling event handlers in React components.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to recreate this benchmark using a different library or approach, here are some alternatives:

1. **Vista.js**: A lightweight alternative to React that provides similar functionality for building web applications.
2. **Preact**: Another lightweight JavaScript framework that shares similarities with React but has a smaller footprint.
3. **VanillaJS**: Using native JavaScript features and DOM APIs to achieve similar results without relying on a library.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark code, as they have different APIs and design philosophies compared to React.

In summary, this benchmark compares two approaches to handling event handlers in React components: inline and reference. The comparison highlights the trade-offs between readability, maintainability, and performance.

React (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `Inline vs Reference`

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Inline

Reference

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

React (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Inline vs Reference

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Inline

Reference

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Inline vs Reference`