Benchmark: test benchmark - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

object = { x: 'y' };
Object.defineProperty(object, 'prop', { configurable: false });
proxy = new Proxy(object, {})
proxyWithHandler = new Proxy(object, {
	get(...x) {
    	return proxyWithHandler
    }
})

Tests:

basic
object.x
direct proxy access
proxy.x
proxyhandler access
proxyWithHandler.x

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
basic
direct proxy access
proxyhandler access

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/132.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 132 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
basic	137424064.0 Ops/sec
direct proxy access	59291540.0 Ops/sec
proxyhandler access	37123812.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 3 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark you provided is designed to measure the performance of different ways to access properties of a JavaScript object, specifically examining how direct property access compares to property access through proxies with different configurations.

### Options Compared:

1. **Direct Access (`object.x`)**:
   - This test accesses a property directly from a standard JavaScript object.
   - **Performance Result**: This option shows the highest execution speed. 
   - **Pros**: 
     - Fastest access since it's a straightforward lookup.
     - No additional overheads from proxies, resulting in optimal performance.
   - **Cons**: 
     - Lacks any additional functionality that might be enabled by using proxies (e.g., behavior modification).

2. **Direct Proxy Access (`proxy.x`)**:
   - This test accesses a property through a proxy that wraps the original object without any interceptors (handlers) defined.
   - **Performance Result**: This option demonstrates a significant drop in performance compared to direct access, but it is still faster than accessing through a handler-enabled proxy.
   - **Pros**:
     - Allows for interception of operations in the future if handlers are added.
     - Can provide a layer of functionality such as logging or validation.
   - **Cons**:
     - Increased overhead due to the proxy object, causing slower property access than direct access.

3. **Proxy with Handler Access (`proxyWithHandler.x`)**:
   - This test accesses a property through a proxy that includes a handler with a custom `get` trap method.
   - **Performance Result**: This option shows the slowest execution speed among the three tests.
   - **Pros**:
     - Provides the ability to customize behavior on property access (e.g., dynamically returning values, adding side effects).
     - Useful for scenarios where intercepting operations is critical (e.g., state management, or modifications).
   - **Cons**: 
     - The performance penalty is substantial due to the overhead of invoking the trap function every time a property is accessed.
     - Complexity increases, making the code potentially harder to understand and maintain.

### Other Considerations:

- **Use Cases**: The choice between these methods depends on the particular needs of a project. For example, if performance is critical and the additional flexibility of proxies is unnecessary, direct object access is the best option. In contrast, if the project requires interception and modification of property access, a proxy with handlers may be worth the performance cost.
- **Browser Support**: Proxies were introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). Engineers should ensure that the environments they are targeting support this feature, especially when dealing with legacy codebases.
- **Optimization**: For performance-critical applications, profiling different access patterns with real workloads is essential. While this benchmark provides initial insights, performance can vary based on the context in which the code is executed.

### Alternatives:

- **Standard Objects**: For the simplest scenarios where advanced features of proxies aren’t needed, standard JavaScript objects are preferable due to their speed and simplicity.
- **OOP Patterns**: In many cases, using Object-oriented programming patterns with classes can encapsulate functionality and state without resorting to proxies.
- **Libraries**: Libraries or frameworks that provide state management or observability (like MobX or Redux) can offer similar benefits to what proxies provide. These might abstract some complexity while maintaining good performance.

In summary, this benchmark provides a clear comparative analysis of property access methods in JavaScript, enabling software engineers to make informed decisions based on the specific requirements of their applications.

Related benchmarks:

test benchmark (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: basic vs direct proxy access vs proxyhandler access

Created: 3 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

basic

direct proxy access

proxyhandler access

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 3 months ago):