Benchmark: Spread vs deconstruction

Script Preparation code:

function getObj() {
    return {
        a: "a",
        b: "a",
        c: "a",
        d: "a",
        e: "a",
        f: "a",
        g: "a",
        h: "a",
        i: "a",
        j: "a",
    }
}

Tests:

Spread
const obj = getObj(); const newObj = { ...obj }
destructure
const { a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j } = getObj(); const newObj = { a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Spread
destructure

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.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case, specifically comparing two approaches to creating an object with spread syntax and destructuring.

**What is being tested?**

Two different methods are being compared:

1. **Spread Syntax (`{ ...obj }`)**: This approach uses the spread operator to create a new object by copying the properties of `obj`.
2. **Destructuring (`const { a, b, c, ... } = getObj();`)**: This approach uses destructuring to extract individual properties from `getObj()` and then creates a new object with those properties.

**Options comparison**

The two options are compared in terms of performance, with the benchmark measuring the execution time per second for each option. The test is run multiple times to ensure accurate results.

Pros and Cons:

* **Spread Syntax**:
	+ Pros: Simple to read and write, can be easily extended with more properties.
	+ Cons: May not be as efficient as destructuring for large objects.
* **Destructuring**:
	+ Pros: Can be more efficient than spread syntax for large objects, allows for filtering out unwanted properties.
	+ Cons: Requires careful property ordering, can be harder to read and write.

**Library usage**

None of the test cases use any external libraries.

**Special JS features or syntax**

The benchmark uses the following feature:

* **Spread Syntax**: Introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6), this operator allows for creating a new object by copying properties from an existing object.
* **Destructuring**: Also introduced in ES6, this feature allows for extracting individual properties from an object and assigning them to variables.

**Other alternatives**

For comparing the performance of these two approaches, other alternatives could include:

* Using `Object.assign()` to create a new object with spread syntax
* Using `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(obj))` to create a deep copy of the object (although this method may not be suitable for all use cases)
* Comparing the performance of using `Object.create()` and then assigning properties to the new object

However, these alternatives may not provide the same level of readability and simplicity as the spread syntax and destructuring approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Spread vs deconstruction (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Spread vs destructure

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Spread

destructure

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):