Benchmark: Object.create vs constructor

Tests:

Object.create
for(let i = 0;i < 10000000;i++ ){ const test = Object.create(null); }
Constructor
for(let i = 0;i < 10000000;i++ ){ const test = {} }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Object.create
Constructor

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/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/15.6.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 15 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Object.create	316.2 Ops/sec
Constructor	317.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its results.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two microbenchmarks that compare the performance of `Object.create(null)` and using constructors in JavaScript. Both benchmarks aim to create an object without any prototype chain.

**Options compared:**

* **`Object.create(null)`**: This method creates a new object with no prototype, effectively making it a bare object (i.e., no inheritance).
* **Using constructors (`{}`)**: In this approach, an empty object is created using the `{}` syntax, which also results in a bare object.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

* `Object.create(null)`:
	+ Pros:
		- It's more explicit and readable than using constructors.
		- No risk of accidentally creating objects with implicit inheritance (which can lead to unexpected behavior).
	+ Cons:
		- It may be slightly slower due to the extra function call.
		- Some older JavaScript engines might not support `Object.create` at all, which could affect compatibility.
* Using constructors (`{}`):
	+ Pros:
		- It's a more concise and familiar syntax for creating objects in many developers' experience.
		- Modern JavaScript engines generally support it natively.
	+ Cons:
		- May lead to implicit inheritance if the constructed object is not properly handled (e.g., by setting ` prototypes` property explicitly).
		- Might be perceived as less readable or maintainable than using `Object.create`.

**Other considerations:**

* Both approaches are suitable for creating bare objects without any prototype chain, but they serve different purposes:
	+ `Object.create(null)` is often used when you want to create an object with a specific set of properties or methods that should be inherited from the original prototype.
	+ Using constructors (`{}`) is typically used when you need to create a new object and don't care about its inheritance hierarchy.

**Library usage:**

There are no libraries explicitly mentioned in the provided JSON. However, some JavaScript engines might rely on internal libraries or frameworks that could influence benchmark results.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

Neither of the benchmarks specifically utilizes special features like ES6 classes, generators, or async/await. The tests focus solely on basic object creation mechanisms.

**Benchmark preparation code and result explanation:**

The provided JSON includes two individual test cases:

1. `Object.create(null)`: Creates a new object using `Object.create(null)` to ensure it has no prototype chain.
2. Using constructors (`{}`): Creates an empty object using the `{}` syntax, also resulting in a bare object.

The benchmark results show that:

* The constructor approach (`{}`) is faster on this specific test case (1.5527950525283813 executions per second), likely due to its concise syntax and native support.
* However, `Object.create(null)` performs slightly worse (397.6217041015625 executions per second) in terms of raw execution speed.

Keep in mind that these results may not be representative for all JavaScript environments or use cases.

**Other alternatives:**

In addition to the provided benchmarks, other alternatives for creating bare objects include:

* Using a class expression (`new Date()` instead of `Date`)
* Utilizing the `Object.assign({}, obj)` method (which also creates an object without inheritance)

These alternatives might be worth exploring in specific scenarios or when dealing with compatibility issues.

Related benchmarks:

Object.create vs constructor (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Object.create vs Constructor

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Object.create

Constructor

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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