Benchmark: method calls overhead

Script Preparation code:

var timesTwo = function(num) {
  return num * 2;
}

Tests:

without function call
let a = Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) * 2;
with function call
let a = timesTwo(Math.floor(Math.random() * 100));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
without function call
with function call

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 11 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 135 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
without function call	133299640.0 Ops/sec
with function call	131608032.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition, test cases, and latest benchmark result to explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition:**
The benchmark is designed to measure the overhead of method calls in JavaScript. The script preparation code defines two functions: `timesTwo`, which takes a number as input and returns its double, and an empty function (not used in this example). The benchmark definition includes two test cases:

1. **Without function call**: This test case uses the literal value 100 multiplied by 2 to simulate a method call without actually calling a function.
2. **With function call**: This test case calls the `timesTwo` function with an argument, simulating a method call.

**Options Compared:**
The benchmark compares two approaches:

1. **Literal multiplication**: Using arithmetic operations (multiplication) directly in the code, without invoking a function.
2. **Function call**: Invoking the `timesTwo` function to perform the same calculation.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

* **Literal Multiplication**:
	+ Pros:
		- Faster execution time, as it avoids the overhead of function calls.
		- More efficient in terms of CPU cycles.
	+ Cons:
		- May lead to code readability issues if not properly explained.
		- Not suitable for all scenarios where functions are used for encapsulation or modularity.
* **Function Call**:
	+ Pros:
		- Encapsulates the calculation logic, making it reusable and easier to maintain.
		- Allows for better error handling and edge cases.
	+ Cons:
		- Slower execution time due to function call overhead.

**Library:**
In this benchmark, there is no explicit library used. However, the `Math` object is used within the `timesTwo` function, which is a built-in JavaScript library providing mathematical functions.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax (None):**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives:**
If you wanted to compare different approaches for method calls in JavaScript, some alternatives could be:

* Using a Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler like SpiderMonkey (used by Firefox) or V8 (used by Chrome).
* Comparing the performance of different language implementations, such as Python's CPython or Java's OpenJDK.
* Evaluating the impact of various optimization techniques, like inlining, caching, or memoization.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark definition and test cases.

Related benchmarks:

method calls overhead (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: without function call vs with function call

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

without function call

with function call

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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