Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Destructuring vs undefined
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Destructuring vs Undefined
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
const user = { email: "123@email.com", password: "AA&Â&A*&AA" }
Tests:
Destructuring
const user = { email: "123@email.com", password: "AA&Â&A*&AA" } const { password, ...toBeReturned} = user;
Undefined
const user = { email: "123@email.com", password: "AA&Â&A*&AA" } user.password = undefined;
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Destructuring
Undefined
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):
**What is being tested on the provided JSON?** The provided JSON represents two test cases for JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net. The tests are designed to compare the performance of destructuring assignment with `undefined` (in this case, setting `user.password` to `undefined`) versus regular object access. In other words, the tests are measuring how fast it is to access and manipulate objects in JavaScript using two different approaches: 1. Destructuring assignment: This involves using the syntax `{ ... }` to extract specific properties from an object, assigning them to variables. 2. Regular object access: This involves accessing a property directly on an object without extracting it into a variable. **Options being compared** The options being compared are: * Destructuring assignment with `undefined` * Regular object access with setting a property to `undefined` **Pros and cons of each approach** Destructuring assignment with `undefined`: Pros: * Can be more concise and readable, especially for complex objects * Avoids the need to explicitly check if a property exists Cons: * May incur a small overhead due to the need to create an object literal and extract properties * Can lead to unexpected behavior if not used carefully (e.g., assigning `undefined` to a required variable) Regular object access with setting a property to `undefined`: Pros: * Can be more explicit and intuitive, especially for simple objects or when working with legacy code * Does not incur the overhead of creating an object literal Cons: * May require more lines of code and can look less concise * Forces the developer to explicitly check if a property exists **Library usage** There is no library used in this benchmark. The tests only involve basic JavaScript syntax. **Special JS feature or syntax** This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what is considered standard in modern JavaScript. **Other considerations** When writing performance-critical code, it's essential to consider the trade-offs between conciseness, readability, and performance. In this case, the tests are designed to compare two approaches that have different overheads and implications for developer intent. **Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative ways to optimize object access in JavaScript, you might consider: * Using `Object.assign()` or other spread operators to create a new object with only the desired properties * Utilizing `Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call()` to check if a property exists before accessing it * Employing caching mechanisms to reduce the number of times objects are accessed Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and trade-offs compared to destructuring assignment or regular object access.
Related benchmarks:
Delete vs destructure for objects
undefined vs delete
Object property: delete vs undefined 2
Delete vs destructure for objects v2 2
Delete vs destructure for objects without mutating 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?