Benchmark: eval vs function object vs function

Script Preparation code:

var funcObj = new Function("return 2 * 3");
var func = ()=> {return 2*3};

Tests:

eval
eval("2 * 3");
funcObj
funcObj();
func
func();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
eval
funcObj
func

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/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/124.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 124 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
eval	8125378.0 Ops/sec
funcObj	29877140.0 Ops/sec
func	30185006.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll provide an explanation of the provided JSON data for MeasureThat.net, which represents JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided benchmark definition is in JSON format and defines three different approaches to perform a simple arithmetic operation: `eval`, `function object`, and `arrow function`. The script preparation code defines two functions: `funcObj` and `func`, which will be used as test cases for the benchmarks.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares three options:

1. **`eval`**: Uses the built-in JavaScript `eval` function to execute a string containing a simple arithmetic expression.
2. **`function object`**: Creates a new `Function` object with a single expression, which is then invoked using the dot notation (`funcObj()`).
3. **`arrow function`**: Defines an arrow function (`=> {return 2*3}`) that returns the result of the multiplication.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

1. **`eval`**:
	* Pros: Easy to implement, can be used for complex expressions.
	* Cons: Performance is slow due to the overhead of parsing and executing the expression string. Also, it poses security risks if not sanitized properly.
2. **`function object`**:
	* Pros: Faster than `eval`, as it avoids parsing and execution overhead.
	* Cons: Requires creating a new function object with a single expression, which can be overkill for simple arithmetic operations.
3. **`arrow function`**:
	* Pros: Lightweight, concise, and readable syntax.
	* Cons: May have some performance overhead due to the creation of a new function object.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these approaches, consider the trade-offs:

* **Readability**: Arrow functions might be more readable for simple arithmetic operations.
* **Performance**: `function object` is likely to perform better than `eval`, but may require more resources.
* **Security**: Be cautious when using `eval`, as it can pose security risks.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

In this benchmark, the following library or feature is used:

* No specific library is mentioned. However, `Function` objects are used to create a function with a single expression, which might be considered a JavaScript-specific construct.
* No special JavaScript features or syntaxes are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches for performing simple arithmetic operations, consider:

1. **Template literals**: JavaScript template literals (e.g., `x = 2 * 3`) can be used to perform arithmetic operations and might offer better performance than the current options.
2. **Built-in functions**: Other built-in functions like `Math` or `Number.prototype` could potentially offer faster execution times for simple arithmetic operations.

Keep in mind that these alternatives are not necessarily part of MeasureThat.net's benchmark, but they can be explored for comparison purposes.

Related benchmarks:

eval vs function object vs function (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: eval vs funcObj vs func

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

eval

funcObj

func

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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