Benchmark: дедушкины сказки

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [3,6,2,4,5];

Tests:

destr iter
var [a,b,c,d,e] = arr;
destr
var {0: a, 1:b, 2:c, 3:d, 4:e} = arr;
ind
var a = arr[0] b = arr[1] c = arr[2] d = arr[3] e = arr[4]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
destr iter
destr
ind

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
destr iter	7051935.0 Ops/sec
destr	7800183.5 Ops/sec
ind	514572.9 Ops/sec

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 JSON**

The provided Benchmark Definition JSON represents a simple benchmark with two test cases: `destr` and `destr iter`. The script preparation code is `var arr = [3,6,2,4,5];`.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code `var arr = [3,6,2,4,5];` defines an array variable `arr` containing five integer values.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares three different approaches to destructure the `arr` array:

1. **Destructuring syntax with object literal (`{}`)**: `var {0: a, 1:b, 2:c, 3:d, 4:e} = arr;`
	* Pros: Concise and readable syntax.
	* Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of creating an object literal.
2. **Destructuring syntax with array brackets (`[]`)**: `var [a,b,c,d,e] = arr;`
	* Pros: Similar conciseness and readability as object literal, but potentially faster since it doesn't create a new object.
	* Cons: May be less readable for those unfamiliar with this syntax.
3. **Manual assignment**: `var a = arr[0]\r\n b = arr[1]\r\n c = arr[2]\r\n d = arr[3]\r\n e = arr[4];`
	* Pros: Easy to understand and maintain, but verbose and error-prone.
	* Cons: Slow due to the manual assignment of each variable.

**Library Used**

The benchmark uses no external libraries. It's a pure JavaScript implementation.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The `destr` and `destr iter` test cases utilize the new destructuring syntax in JavaScript, which allows for concise assignment of values from an array to multiple variables.

**Other Considerations**

When writing microbenchmarks, it's essential to consider factors like:

* Input data size: How does the benchmark perform with larger or smaller input datasets?
* Platform and browser differences: Does the benchmark consistently produce similar results across different browsers and platforms?
* Edge cases: Are there any unusual input values or scenarios that could skew the benchmark results?

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to MeasureThat.net, consider:

1. **BenchMarking.js**: A popular JavaScript benchmarking library.
2. **BenchmarkJS**: Another well-established JavaScript benchmarking framework.
3. **jsperf**: A web-based tool for comparing JavaScript performance.

These alternatives offer various features and configurations to suit different use cases and performance testing needs.

Related benchmarks:

дедушкины сказки (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: destr iter vs destr vs ind

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

destr iter

destr

ind

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):