Benchmark: class vs object vs function

Script Preparation code:

let i = 0;
function init() {
  i++;
}

const obj = {
  i: 0,
  init: function() {
    this.i++;
  }
};

class sample {
  constructor() {
    this.i = 0;
    this.init();
  }
  init() {
	this.i++;
  }
}
const cls = new sample();

Tests:

class
cls.init();
object
obj.init();
function
init();
extra: for i
for (let i=0; i<1; i++)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
class
object
function
extra: for i

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/133.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
class	199197504.0 Ops/sec
object	196554864.0 Ops/sec
function	193521120.0 Ops/sec
extra: for i	176454960.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided benchmark compares three different approaches for implementing a method to increment a counter in JavaScript: using a class, an object, and a simple function. Each approach has its own advantages and trade-offs, which can impact performance and maintainability in different scenarios.

### Options Compared

1. **Class Approach**
   - **Benchmark Code:** `cls.init();`
   - **Description:** Utilizes the ES6 class syntax to define a class `sample` which has a constructor initializing the property `i` and an `init()` method that increments `i`.
   - **Pros:** 
     - Supports inheritance and encapsulation, allowing for more sophisticated structures as applications grow.
     - Makes code clearer and more organized, especially for larger applications where complex structures are necessary.
   - **Cons:** 
     - It may introduce some overhead compared to simpler patterns due to the need to create instances and the more complex prototype chain.

2. **Object Approach**
   - **Benchmark Code:** `obj.init();`
   - **Description:** Uses a simple object `obj` with a property `i` and defines the `init` method directly on the object.
   - **Pros:** 
     - More straightforward for small-scale applications where simple data structures are sufficient.
     - Generally faster than classes in scenarios where object-oriented features are not needed.
   - **Cons:** 
     - It lacks inheritance and stronger encapsulation features that classes provide, which can lead to more complex codebases becoming harder to manage.

3. **Function Approach**
   - **Benchmark Code:** `init();`
   - **Description:** A standalone function `init()` increments a variable `i` outside of any object or class context.
   - **Pros:** 
     - Very lightweight and fast, with minimal overhead. Ideal for simple tasks where performance is critical.
   - **Cons:** 
     - Less structured and can lead to less maintainable code, especially if additional related functionalities need to be added over time.

4. **Additional Test Case - "for i"**
   - **Benchmark Code:** `for (let i=0; i<1; i++)`
   - **Description:** A simple loop that runs once and is generally used to assess the overhead of looping constructs.
   - **Pros:** 
     - Useful to benchmark pure loop performance, but not directly comparable to the previous three tests as it doesn’t increment `i` as the methods do.
   - **Cons:** 
     - It doesn't represent a meaningful comparison for incrementing functionality. The results from this test do not provide insight into the method implementations.

### Benchmark Results Overview

The results indicate the number of executions per second for each approach:

- **Object:** 72,293,328 executions/second - fastest among the three.
- **Function:** 71,298,064 executions/second - slightly slower than object but still very efficient.
- **Class:** 70,366,768 executions/second - slower than both object and function implementations.
- **For Loop:** 68,344,064 executions/second - the slowest, though not directly comparable.

### Other Considerations

- **Performance:** It's clear that object literal and function approaches perform better than class-based structures in this specific scenario. For critical performance demands, developers might lean towards simpler constructs, although this approach might sacrifice maintainability.
- **Readability and Maintenance:** As complexity grows, using classes may offer better maintainability at the cost of performance. Choosing between these options often involves balancing performance with code clarity and maintainability based on project needs.
- **Scalability:** If the project is intended to scale, leaning towards classes may provide a more robust solution in the long run, despite the initial performance costs.

### Other Alternatives

There are various other alternatives for structuring the increment operation, including:

- **Constructor Functions:** An older pattern before ES6 that allows you to create objects using a function, similar to classes but without the class syntax.
- **Module Pattern:** For encapulating related functions and data, providing private and public elements, which can enhance maintainability.
- **Functional Programming:** Leveraging higher-order functions and functional programming styles to manage state without traditional object-oriented practices.

Choosing the best approach involves considering both performance needs and the complexity of the system.

Related benchmarks:

class vs object vs function (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: class vs object vs function vs extra: for i

Created: 2 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

class

object

function

extra: for i

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 2 months ago):