Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
field vs property2gdfgdfgdf
(version: 0)
field vs property
Comparing performance of:
lodash vs native
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
class MyClass { constructor() { this.field = 1; } set field_value(val) { this.field = val; } get field_value() { return this.field; } } var theInstance = new MyClass();
Tests:
lodash
theInstance.field_value = (theInstance.field_value) + 1; console.log(theInstance.field);
native
theInstance.field = (theInstance.field) + 1; console.log(theInstance.field);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lodash
native
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; rv:124.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/124.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 124 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=516181" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
lodash
296K/s
native
277K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
lodash
296,356 Ops/sec
native
277,115 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, the options compared, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark is testing two approaches: using a property (field) to access and modify data, versus using an accessor function (`set field_value(val)`). The goal is to determine which approach is faster for simple arithmetic operations on integers. **Options Compared** 1. **Using a Property**: This approach uses the `this.field` syntax to access and modify the value of the `field` property. It's a common way to access properties in JavaScript. 2. **Using an Accessor Function**: The alternative approach uses an accessor function, where `field_value` is set using `theInstance.field_value = val;`, and retrieved using `console.log(theInstance.field_value);`. This approach creates an explicit getter and setter for the property. **Pros and Cons** 1. Using a Property: * Pros: more concise and readable code * Cons: + May be slower due to indirect access (via `this`) + Less control over property access (no explicit getter/setter) 2. Using an Accessor Function: * Pros: explicit control over property access, potentially faster due to direct access * Cons: + More verbose and less readable code + Creates a new accessor function object **Considerations** 1. **Indirect vs Direct Access**: In JavaScript, accessing properties using `this` can lead to indirect calls, which might incur additional overhead compared to direct access using the property name. 2. **Getter/Setter Control**: Using an accessor function provides explicit control over how the property is accessed and modified. **Library/Library-Free** This benchmark uses only built-in JavaScript features and does not rely on any external libraries. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. It's a straightforward test of two simple approaches to accessing and modifying data. **Other Alternatives** If you wanted to compare the performance of these approaches, you might consider adding additional variations, such as: * Using getters and setters with different access control modes (e.g., `const`-only vs `get`/`set` methods) * Adding intermediate arithmetic operations before accessing the property * Comparing the performance of these approaches with other language features or data structures
Related benchmarks
Data Properties vs Getter / Setter Methods ES2015
ES6 property (get/set) & getter/setter function vs direct access to object attribute (private and not)
ES6 property (get/set) & getter/setter function vs direct access to object attribute (private and not) v2
field vs property2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?