Benchmark: Prototype vs simulated private

Tests:

Simulated private
(function (root, factory) { var moduleName = 'Test'; if (typeof define === 'function' && define.amd) { define(moduleName, factory); } else if (typeof exports === 'object') { module.exports = factory(); } else { root[moduleName] = factory(moduleName); } }(this, function (moduleName) { function Test(element) { this.element = element; var a = function () { return "a" }; var b = function () { return "b" }; var c = function () { return "c" }; (function init() { console.log(a()); }()); } return Test }));
Prototype
(function (root, factory) { var moduleName = 'Test'; if (typeof define === 'function' && define.amd) { define(moduleName, factory); } else if (typeof exports === 'object') { module.exports = factory(); } else { root[moduleName] = factory(moduleName); } }(this, function (moduleName) { function Test(element) { this.element = element; } Test.prototype.a = function () { return "a" }; Test.prototype.b = function () { return "b" }; Test.prototype.c = function () { return "c" }; return Test }));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Simulated private
Prototype

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark comparison tests two approaches: simulated private and prototype inheritance.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition json consists of an array with two objects, each representing a test case:

* `Test Name`: "Simulated private" or "Prototype"
* `Benchmark Definition`: A JavaScript code snippet that defines the test
* `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code` are empty, indicating that no additional setup is required for these tests

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Simulated Private**: This approach uses a function expression to create an object with prototype properties. The object is created on the fly using a function, which returns an instance of the `Test` class.
2. **Prototype**: This approach uses traditional inheritance by defining a constructor function for the `Test` class and setting its prototype.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Simulated Private**:
	+ Pros: Can provide more fine-grained control over object creation and prototype chains, which can lead to better performance in certain scenarios.
	+ Cons: May introduce additional overhead due to function expression creation and dynamic property assignment.
* **Prototype**:
	+ Pros: Establishes a traditional inheritance hierarchy, making it easier to understand and maintain code. Additionally, it can provide better performance for cases where object creation is expensive.
	+ Cons: May lead to tighter coupling between classes and require more manual property management.

**Library and Special JS Features**

* The `define` function is used in both test cases, which is part of the AMD (Asynchronous Module Definition) module system. It allows defining modules with different dependencies.
* There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used beyond what's standard for creating objects and prototypes.

**Other Alternatives**

Other approaches to inheritance in JavaScript include:

1. **Class-based inheritance**: Using classes and inheritance methods like `extends` and `super()` can provide a more traditional and readable way of implementing inheritance.
2. **Function composition**: Combining functions to create a new, composed function that inherits behavior from the original functions can be an alternative to prototype inheritance.

**Benchmark Result**

The latest benchmark result shows two executions per second for each test case:

* `Simulated private`: 1698776.5 executions per second
* `Prototype`: 565835.375 executions per second

This indicates that the simulated private approach may provide better performance in this specific benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Prototype vs simulated private (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Simulated private vs Prototype

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Simulated private

Prototype

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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