Benchmark: inner-vs-outer-fn-declaration-2

Tests:

inner
const foo = () => { const a = (arg1) => arg1 * Math.random(); const b = (arg2) => arg2.map((el) => el * 2); return b(Array.from({ length: 100 }, (_, i) => a(i))) } Array.from({ length: 300 }, foo);
outer
const a = (arg1) => arg1 * Math.random(); const b = (arg2) => arg2.map((el) => el * 2); const foo = () => b(Array.from({ length: 100 }, (_, i) => a(i))) Array.from({ length: 300 }, foo);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
inner
outer

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.

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

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that contains information about the test case. In this case, it's quite simple:

* `Name`: "inner-vs-outer-fn-declaration-2"
* `Description`: null
* `Script Preparation Code`: null (empty string)
* `Html Preparation Code`: null (empty string)

This means the benchmark focuses on comparing the performance of two different function declaration approaches: inner function declarations and outer function declarations.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases, each representing a different approach:

1. **Inner Function Declaration**:
```javascript
const foo = () => {
  const a = (arg1) => arg1 * Math.random();
  const b = (arg2) => arg2.map((el) => el * 2);
  
  return b(Array.from({ length: 100 }, (_, i) => a(i)));
}

Array.from({ length: 300 }, foo);
```
In this test case, the `foo` function is declared inside another function (essentially making it an inner function). The `foo` function returns a result that involves creating an array and applying two transformations (`a` and `b`) to its elements.

2. **Outer Function Declaration**:
```javascript
const a = (arg1) => arg1 * Math.random();
const b = (arg2) => arg2.map((el) => el * 2);
const foo = () => b(Array.from({ length: 100 }, (_, i) => a(i)));

Array.from({ length: 300 }, foo);
```
In this test case, the `foo` function is declared outside another function (making it an outer function). The logic inside `foo` is similar to the inner function declaration version.

**Options Compared**

The two main options being compared are:

* **Inner Function Declaration**: A function declared inside another function.
* **Outer Function Declaration**: A function declared outside another function.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

* **Inner Function Declaration**
	+ Pros:
		- Can be used to create closures (functions that have access to their outer scope).
		- Can improve code organization by nesting functions.
	+ Cons:
		- May lead to performance issues due to the overhead of creating inner scopes.
		- Can make debugging more challenging due to the complexity of the function call stack.
* **Outer Function Declaration**
	+ Pros:
		- Typically results in better performance since there's less scope overhead.
		- Easier to debug and understand due to a simpler function call stack.
	+ Cons:
		- May require more boilerplate code (e.g., declaring separate functions for each logic path).

**Library and Special JS Features**

There are no libraries or special JavaScript features mentioned in the benchmark definition. The focus is solely on comparing the performance of inner vs outer function declarations.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking to compare other function declaration approaches, some alternatives might include:

* **Function Expressions**: Using a function expression (e.g., `const foo = () => { ... }`) instead of a traditional function declaration.
* **Arrow Functions**: Comparing the performance of arrow functions (`() => { ... }`) with traditional function declarations.
* **Async/Await**: Including async/await syntax to compare its performance with traditional synchronous code.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might require more setup and adjustments in the benchmark definition.

Related benchmarks:

inner-vs-outer-fn-declaration-2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: inner vs outer

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

inner

outer

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):