Benchmark: Direct call vs bind vs call vs apply v23

Script Preparation code:

function test(msg) {
  var d = msg;
}
const f = test;
const fb = test.bind(null);

Tests:

direct call
f("Hello");
bind
fb("Hello");
call
f.call(null, "Hello");
apply
f.apply(null, ["Hello"]);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
direct call
bind
call
apply

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:135.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/135.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 135 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

call

2297.4M/s

direct call

2252.6M/s

apply

223.4M/s

bind

208.4M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ call	2,297,418,752 Ops/sec
direct call	2,252,624,896 Ops/sec
apply	223,404,624 Ops/sec
bind	208,411,824 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

This benchmark compares the performance of four different ways to invoke a JavaScript function: direct call, `bind`, `call`, and `apply`. The benchmark is defined in the provided JSON format, which outlines the test cases along with their respective definitions and results.

### Options Compared

1. **Direct Call** (`f("Hello")`):
   - **Description**: The function is invoked directly.
   - **Pros**: 
     - Fastest execution as it involves no additional overhead.
   - **Cons**: 
     - Limited in flexibility, as it can't change the context (`this` binding) or pass an array of arguments.
   
2. **Bind** (`fb("Hello")`):
   - **Description**: The `bind` method creates a new function that, when called, has its `this` keyword set to a specified value, with a given sequence of arguments preceding any provided when the new function is called.
   - **Pros**: 
     - Useful for creating functions with a preset context or argument.
     - Allows for more flexible function invocation when used with event handlers or callbacks.
   - **Cons**: 
     - Slower than a direct call as it involves function creation overhead.

3. **Call** (`f.call(null, "Hello")`):
   - **Description**: The `call` method calls a function with a specified `this` value and individual arguments.
   - **Pros**: 
     - It allows for dynamic context binding and is suitable when the number of arguments is known.
   - **Cons**: 
     - Slower than a direct call due to the context manipulation.
     - Requires each argument to be passed separately.

4. **Apply** (`f.apply(null, ["Hello"])`):
   - **Description**: The `apply` method calls a function with a given `this` value and an array of arguments.
   - **Pros**: 
     - Useful when calling functions with an unknown number of arguments, as it accepts an array.
   - **Cons**: 
     - The slowest of all options in this benchmark due to the array creation and the overhead involved in argument unpacking.

### Considerations for Performance

When evaluating performance, it's essential to consider the context in which these methods will be used:

- **Speed vs. Flexibility**: While the direct call method is the fastest, it lacks flexibility. Binding functions with `bind`, `call`, or `apply` provides greater flexibility in certain applications, especially when dealing with callbacks or event handlers.
  
- **Function Overhead**: Using `bind` introduces some overhead as it creates a new function each time, while `call` and `apply` merely manipulate the context and arguments of the existing function.

- **Use Cases**: Depending on the scenario, developers might prefer one approach over the others. For instance, if you rely heavily on callbacks or handling events, `bind` can be immensely beneficial, albeit a bit slower.

### Alternative Approaches

1. **Arrow Functions**: In ES6, using arrow functions can change how `this` is handled, reducing the need for some usages of `bind`, but this only applies if dealing with methods that need 'lexical' `this`.

2. **Partial Application**: Libraries such as Lodash provide utility functions to create partially applied functions, which can be a more flexible alternative to `bind`.

3. **Function Composition**: Instead of directly invoking and binding functions, you might consider functional programming techniques, where you compose functions together, allowing for cleaner and often more maintainable code.

In conclusion, understanding the implications of each method will aid developers in writing more efficient and maintainable JavaScript code.

Direct call vs bind vs call vs apply v23 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: `direct call vs bind vs call vs apply`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

direct call

bind

call

apply

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

Direct call vs bind vs call vs apply v23 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: direct call vs bind vs call vs apply

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

direct call

bind

call

apply

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `direct call vs bind vs call vs apply`