Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Inline return, newline undefined return
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Inline return vs Newline return
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
Inline return
let b = { 'a': 1 }; function a (mutable) { return mutable.a = 5; }; a(b);
Newline return
let b = { 'a': 1 }; function a (mutable) { mutable.a = 5; return; } a(b);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Inline return
Newline return
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:135.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/135.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 135 on Linux
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=586788" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Newline return
1672.5M/s
Inline return
1669.0M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Newline return
1,672,454,400 Ops/sec
Inline return
1,668,976,640 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks. **What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents two test cases that measure the performance difference between inline returns and newline-defined returns in JavaScript. Specifically, they test how browsers handle function return statements with or without a newline character. **Options compared:** Two options are compared: 1. **Inline return**: In this approach, the return statement is placed directly within the `function` body, without any explicit newline character. 2. **Newline return**: In this approach, an explicit newline character (`\n`) is added before the return statement. **Pros and Cons:** * **Inline return**: + Pros: This approach can lead to more compact and efficient code, as it eliminates the need for a separate line or block. + Cons: Some browsers might optimize away the inline return statement due to its simplicity, potentially leading to performance regressions. * **Newline return**: + Pros: This approach ensures that the return statement is parsed correctly by all browsers, including those with strict syntax checking. + Cons: It results in slightly longer and less compact code. **Library/Functionality used:** None of the test cases use a specific library. However, the `let` keyword and object literals (e.g., `{ 'a': 1 }`) are part of the ECMAScript standard, so they don't require any external libraries. **JavaScript feature/Syntax:** The test cases demonstrate the use of implicit function return values in JavaScript. In both cases, when the function is called, it will implicitly return `undefined` if no value is specified. This behavior is specific to JavaScript and is not universally supported by other programming languages. **Other alternatives:** To explore different approaches or measure alternative scenarios, you could consider modifying the benchmark code to: * Test with different browsers or versions * Measure performance differences between inline returns vs. return statements without newline characters (e.g., semicolons or tabs) * Compare performance with different data structures (e.g., arrays, objects) instead of simple variables * Investigate the impact of optimizing techniques like minification or compression on JavaScript execution speed Keep in mind that these modifications should be done with caution and thorough testing to ensure accurate results.
Related benchmarks
inline functions vs hoisted
callbacks: inline function vs global
callbacks: inline function vs inline arrow vs global
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?