Benchmark: eval vs new Function vs mathjs

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/mathjs/6.6.1/math.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var func = new Function("return 2 * 3");

Tests:

eval
eval("2 * 3");
new Function
func();
mathjs
math.evaluate("2 * 3");

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 9 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 9 runs

new Function

109.0M/s

eval

6.6M/s

mathjs

743K/s

Fastest: new Function (146.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ new Function: 108,980,384 ops/sec
• eval: 6,647,882 ops/sec
• mathjs: 742,732 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
eval
new Function
mathjs

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/143.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 143 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

new Function

241.7M/s

eval

27.5M/s

mathjs

1.3M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ new Function	241,676,720 Ops/sec
eval	27,518,842 Ops/sec
mathjs	1,251,868 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 for you.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test compares three different approaches to execute arithmetic expressions:

1. `eval`
2. Creating a new function using `Function` constructor
3. Using Math.js library's `evaluate` method

**Options Comparison**

Here are the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **`eval`**
	* Pros: Simple, widely supported, and fast execution.
	* Cons:
		+ Security risks due to code injection vulnerabilities.
		+ Performance overhead due to JavaScript engine's parsing and compilation steps.
		+ Not suitable for production use cases where security is crucial.
2. **Creating a new function using `Function` constructor**
	* Pros: More secure than `eval`, as it doesn't execute arbitrary code.
	* Cons:
		+ Performance overhead due to the creation of a new function object.
		+ Less efficient than `eval` in terms of execution speed.
3. **Using Math.js library's `evaluate` method**
	* Pros: More secure and efficient than `eval`, as it uses a dedicated expression evaluation engine.
	* Cons:
		+ Additional dependency on the Math.js library.
		+ May have a higher performance overhead compared to native JavaScript implementations.

**Library and Special JS Features**

The test case using Math.js library's `evaluate` method includes the following:

1. **Math.js library**: A lightweight, fast, and secure mathematics library for JavaScript. It provides an expression evaluation engine that can be used to evaluate mathematical expressions without the need for a full-fledged JavaScript interpreter.
2. **No special JS features**: The test cases do not use any specialized JavaScript features like async/await, generators, or closures.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to execute arithmetic expressions, consider:

1. **Native JavaScript implementations**: Implementing arithmetic expressions using native JavaScript functions like `*` (multiplication), `/` (division), etc., which are generally faster and more efficient than the tested approaches.
2. **Expression evaluators libraries**: Other expression evaluation libraries like `esprima`, `recast`, or `astringify` can be used instead of Math.js library.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might require more expertise and setup compared to using a dedicated expression evaluation library like Math.js.

eval vs new Function vs mathjs (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `eval vs new Function vs mathjs`

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

eval

new Function

mathjs

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 9 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 9 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

eval vs new Function vs mathjs (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: eval vs new Function vs mathjs

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

eval

new Function

mathjs

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 9 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 9 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `eval vs new Function vs mathjs`