Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
__proto__ vs getPrototypeOf 2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
__proto__ vs getPrototypeOf
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var proto1 = x => x.__proto__; var proto2 = x => Object.getPrototypeOf(x);
Tests:
__proto__
proto1({}) proto1([]) proto1(123)
getPrototypeOf
proto2({}) proto2([]) proto2(123)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
__proto__
getPrototypeOf
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to understand what is being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches to accessing the prototype chain of an object: 1. `proto1` function: This function uses the `__proto__` property to access the prototype chain of an object. It's a shorthand way of saying "get the prototype of this object" and is often used in older JavaScript versions. 2. `proto2` function: This function uses the `Object.getPrototypeOf()` method to access the prototype chain of an object. **Options being compared** The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches: * `__proto__`: The original, shorthand way of accessing the prototype chain. * `getPrototypeOf`: A more explicit and modern way of accessing the prototype chain using a built-in function. **Pros and Cons of each approach** 1. `__proto__`: * Pros: + Faster and more efficient in older JavaScript versions (before ECMAScript 2015). + Often used in legacy codebases. * Cons: + Less readable and maintainable, as it's not a standard property access method. + May cause issues with object serialization or cloning. 2. `getPrototypeOf`: * Pros: + More explicit and modern way of accessing the prototype chain. + Better support for object serialization, cloning, and manipulation. + Follows ECMAScript 2015 and later standards. * Cons: + Slightly slower than `__proto__` in older JavaScript versions. **Library usage** In this benchmark, no external libraries are used. The `proto1` and `proto2` functions rely on built-in JavaScript properties and methods (`__proto__` and `Object.getPrototypeOf()`, respectively). **Special JS features or syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. **Other alternatives** If you want to compare the performance of these approaches, you might also consider testing with: * `Object.create()` instead of `__proto__` * `Reflect.setPrototypeOf()` instead of `getPrototypeOf` However, keep in mind that these alternatives may not provide a direct comparison, as they have different use cases and characteristics. **Benchmark preparation code** The provided script preparation code defines two functions: `proto1` and `proto2`. These functions take an object (`x`) and return its prototype chain using either the `__proto__` property or the `Object.getPrototypeOf()` method, respectively. The code also defines a simple object literal `{}` and an empty array `[]` to be used as test cases. **Individual test cases** The benchmark has two individual test cases: 1. `__proto__`: Tests the performance of accessing the prototype chain using the `__proto__` property. 2. `getPrototypeOf`: Tests the performance of accessing the prototype chain using the `Object.getPrototypeOf()` method. These test cases are designed to demonstrate the difference in performance between these two approaches on various inputs (objects, arrays).
Related benchmarks:
Read property reflect vs getOwnPropertyDescriptor
Object.setPrototypeOf vs Object literal
setPrototypeOf vs getPrototypeOf
__proto__ vs getPrototypeOf
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?