Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Proxy Test
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Get existing translation vs get Proxied translation: existing vs get Proxied translation: non existent
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
let translation = { KEY: 'value' }; function getTranslation(k) { return translation[k]; } function getProxiedTranslation(k) { const proxyHandler = { get: function(target, prop) { if (!target[prop]) { return 'missing' } return target[prop]; } }; return new Proxy(translation, proxyHandler) }
Tests:
Get existing translation
getTranslation('KEY')
get Proxied translation: existing
getProxiedTranslation('KEY')
get Proxied translation: non existent
getProxiedTranslation('NOERROR')
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Get existing translation
get Proxied translation: existing
get Proxied translation: non existent
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):
**Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark measures the performance of accessing translations using two approaches: 1. Direct access to the `translation` object 2. Using a Proxy to intercept and manipulate property accesses on the `translation` object. **Direct Access Approach** In this approach, the code directly accesses the `translation` object using the `getTranslation()` function. The benchmark measures the execution time of calling `getTranslation('KEY')`, `getProxiedTranslation('KEY')`, and `getProxiedTranslation('NOERROR')`. Pros: * Simple and straightforward implementation * Easy to understand and maintain Cons: * May not handle edge cases or unexpected property accesses well * Does not provide any additional functionality beyond direct access **Proxy-based Approach** In this approach, a Proxy is created to intercept and manipulate property accesses on the `translation` object. The benchmark measures the execution time of calling `getProxiedTranslation('KEY')` and `getProxiedTranslation('NOERROR')`. Pros: * Provides additional control over property access behavior * Can handle edge cases or unexpected property accesses more effectively Cons: * More complex implementation compared to direct access approach * May introduce additional overhead due to Proxy creation and management **Proxy Library** The benchmark uses the built-in `Proxy` constructor in JavaScript, which creates a Proxy object that can intercept and manipulate property accesses on an underlying target object. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There is no special JS feature or syntax used in this benchmark. The code only utilizes standard JavaScript features and syntax. **Other Considerations** When choosing between the direct access and proxy-based approaches, consider the following factors: * Performance: The proxy-based approach may introduce additional overhead due to Proxy creation and management, which could impact performance. * Code complexity: The proxy-based approach is more complex compared to the direct access approach, which may make it harder to maintain and understand. * Edge cases: The proxy-based approach can handle edge cases or unexpected property accesses more effectively than the direct access approach. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for benchmarking JavaScript performance could include: * V8 Benchmark Suite: A set of benchmarks developed by Google to measure the performance of the V8 JavaScript engine. * JSPerf.com: A popular online platform for running and comparing JavaScript benchmarks. * Microbenchmarking libraries like `micro-benchmark` or `benchmark`: These libraries provide a simple way to write and run microbenchmarks in JavaScript. In summary, the benchmark measures the performance of accessing translations using two approaches: direct access and proxy-based access. The choice between these approaches depends on the specific requirements and trade-offs between simplicity, performance, and code complexity.
Related benchmarks:
ES6 Proxy vs JS Object get/set
get vs proxy get v2
Proxy.get(prop) vs obj[prop]
Another Proxy Test
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?