Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Access object att vs create ref
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
access Obj vs ref
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var arr = []; for(i=0; i<100; i++){ arr.push({index:i,val:i+3}); }
Tests:
access Obj
for(i=0; i<100; i++){ let res1=arr[i].val*arr[i].index; }
ref
for(i=0; i<100; i++){ let aux=arr[i]; let res1=aux.val*aux.index; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
access Obj
ref
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):
I'd be happy to help you understand what's being tested in this benchmark. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark is designed to measure the performance difference between two approaches: accessing an object directly and using a reference (or alias) to access it. The test creates an array of objects with an "index" property and a "val" property, and then performs arithmetic operations on these properties. **Options Compared** There are two options being compared: 1. **Accessing the object directly**: This approach uses the dot notation (`arr[i].val` and `arr[i].index`) to access the properties of the objects in the array. 2. **Using a reference (or alias)**: This approach creates an additional variable `aux` that holds a reference to the current object in the array, and then uses this reference to access its properties (`aux.val` and `aux.index`). **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: * **Direct Access**: + Pros: Simple, intuitive, and easy to understand. + Cons: May involve more overhead due to the need to look up the property names, which can lead to slower performance. * **Reference-based Access**: + Pros: Can be faster since it avoids the lookup overhead, as the reference is already known and stored in memory. + Cons: Requires an additional variable, which can add to the memory usage and complexity. **Library and Special JS Features** There doesn't seem to be any specific libraries or special JavaScript features being used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the use of `let` and `const` declarations is modern JavaScript syntax, introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). **Other Considerations** Some other considerations that might affect the performance of these benchmarks include: * **Cache locality**: The direct access approach may have better cache locality since it accesses adjacent elements in memory. * **Branch prediction**: The reference-based approach may be faster due to better branch prediction, as the compiler can predict which branch will be taken (in this case, the one with the `aux` variable). * **Memory allocation and deallocation**: The creation of the additional `aux` variable may involve some overhead in terms of memory allocation and deallocation. **Alternative Benchmarking Approaches** Other alternative benchmarking approaches that could be used to measure performance differences between accessing an object directly and using a reference include: * Using different data structures, such as arrays vs. objects or linked lists. * Adding more complex operations, such as nested loops or recursive functions. * Measuring the impact of different memory allocation strategies, such as caching or pre-allocating memory. I hope this explanation helps! Let me know if you have any further questions.
Related benchmarks:
push vs direct access
push vs. Index write performance
Slice vs Pop vs At(-1)
Slice vs spread and Pop
arr.at(-1) vs arr[arr.length - 1]
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?