Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Object literal vs Object.create(null) v4 13.07.2023
(version: 0)
compare performance of object creating non-empty objects using object literal vs Object.create
Comparing performance of:
Object.create(null) vs object literal
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
Object.create(null)
let o; const create = Object.create.bind(null, null); for (let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { o = create() }
object literal
let o; for (let i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { o = {} }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Object.create(null)
object literal
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/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 135 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=602381" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
object literal
347K/s
Object.create(null)
8K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
object literal
346,891 Ops/sec
Object.create(null)
8,111 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**Benchmark Overview** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test on the MeasureThat.net website. The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches for creating non-empty objects: using an object literal ( `{}` ) and `Object.create(null)`. **Options Compared** Two options are compared: 1. **Object Literal**: Using curly braces (`{}`) to create a new object. 2. **Object.create(null)**: Using the `Object.create` method with `null` as the prototype to create a new object. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **Object Literal** + Pros: - Widespread support across browsers and engines - Simple and concise syntax - No need for additional memory allocation or setup + Cons: - May result in slower performance due to the overhead of creating a new object with no prototype chain - May lead to more memory allocation if objects are not properly garbage collected * **Object.create(null)** + Pros: - Can provide better performance by avoiding the overhead of creating an empty object with a prototype chain - Reduces memory allocation and can be beneficial for small, simple objects + Cons: - Less widely supported across browsers and engines (although modern engines support it) - Requires additional setup and may require more manual memory management **Library Used** In the provided test case, `Object.create` is used with `null` as the prototype. The purpose of this library is to create a new object without setting its prototype chain. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** The benchmark uses a feature called "binding" (using `bind(null)` in this case). Binding allows you to pass an argument to a function and have it bound to that value, rather than relying on the function's `this` context. In this specific case, `Object.create.bind(null)` is used to create a new object with no prototype chain. **Other Alternatives** If neither of these approaches were available, other alternatives could include: * Using a constructor function (`function ObjectLiteral() { }`) * Using a library like Lodash's `_.create` function * Implementing a custom object creation function using JavaScript's built-in `new` operator and `Object.defineProperty` It is worth noting that the choice of object creation approach depends on the specific use case, performance requirements, and browser or engine support.
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?