Benchmark: new Function vs function(Sample JS Functions)

Script Preparation code:

var newFunc = new Function("x",  "return (x ** 2).toString(36).substring(7).includes('x');");
var regular = function(x){
return (x**2).toString(36).substring(7).includes('x');;
}

Tests:

new Function
newFunc(10);
regular
regular(10)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
new Function
regular

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.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition that tests two different approaches to creating and executing functions in JavaScript:

1. **`new Function()`**: This method is used to create a new function by passing a string containing the function body as its first argument.
2. **`function()`**: This method is used to define a new function directly in the code.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches:

* `new Function()`
* `function()`

**Pros and Cons**

* `new Function()`: This approach has some advantages:
	+ It's more flexible, as you can pass any string to create a new function.
	+ However, it also has some drawbacks:
	+ Performance: Creating a new function using `new Function()` can be slower than defining one directly with the `function` keyword.
	+ Code readability: Using `new Function()` can make code less readable, as the function body is not immediately apparent.

* `function()`: This approach is more traditional and has some benefits:
	+ Performance: Defining a function using `function()` can be faster than creating one with `new Function()`.
	+ Code readability: It's easier to read and write code when defining functions directly with the `function` keyword.
	+ However, it also has some limitations:
	+ Less flexible: You need to pass a string containing the function body as an argument.

**Other Considerations**

* **Error Handling**: When using `new Function()`, you don't have access to the function's scope or local variables. With `function()`, you can define your own error handling mechanisms.
* **Code Generation**: Both approaches can be used for code generation, but `function()` might be more suitable due to its flexibility and performance.

**Library Used (if any)**

In this benchmark, there is no explicit library mentioned or used. However, MeasureThat.net often uses libraries like `benchmark` under the hood to perform these benchmarks.

**Special JS Features/ Syntax (if any)**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. The code only employs standard JavaScript features and syntax.

Now, let's take a look at the test cases:

* `new Function(10)`: This line creates a new function using the `new Function()` method, passing a string containing the function body as its first argument.
* `regular(10)`: This line calls a function named `regular` defined directly in the code.

The latest benchmark result shows that the `regular` function performs slightly better than the `new Function` approach on Chrome Mobile iOS 93, with approximately 4306323 executions per second compared to 4079385 executions per second.

Related benchmarks:

new Function vs function(Sample JS Functions) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: new Function vs regular

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

new Function

regular

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):