Benchmark: Default parameter vs Empty parameter

Script Preparation code:

function foo(arg = false) {
  return (!arg);
}

function bar(arg) {
  return (!arg);
}

Tests:

Default parameter
foo();
Empty parameter
bar();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Default parameter
Empty parameter

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.

Let's break down the benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two functions: `foo` and `bar`. Both functions return the logical negation of their input, i.e., if the input is `true`, the function returns `false`, and vice versa. The main difference between the two functions is that `foo` has a default parameter (`arg = false`) whereas `bar` does not have any default parameters.

**Options compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of:

1. **Default parameter**: `foo(arg = false)`
2. **No default parameter**: `bar(arg)`

**Pros and Cons**

* **Default parameter**: This approach can be useful when you want to provide a default value for a parameter in case it's not provided by the caller. However, it can also lead to unexpected behavior if the function is called with no arguments, as the default value will be used instead of `undefined`. Additionally, this approach requires the compiler or interpreter to perform additional checks and computations when determining whether the parameter has a value.
* **No default parameter**: This approach is simpler and more predictable, as there's no risk of unexpected behavior due to default values. However, it may lead to errors if the function is called with no arguments.

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's likely that the benchmark is running in a JavaScript environment that provides some level of built-in functionality for evaluating logical expressions and handling default parameters.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

There are no special features or syntax specifically highlighted in this benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript syntax for functions, logical operators (`!`), and parameter declarations.

**Other alternatives**

If the benchmark were to measure performance differences between other variants of these functions (e.g., using `let`, `const`, or `var` for variable declaration; or comparing different optimization levels), it might consider exploring the following options:

* **Different function types**: e.g., comparing a closure-based implementation versus an arrow function.
* **Type checking and annotation**: e.g., measuring performance with and without explicit type annotations.
* **JS engine variations**: e.g., comparing performance across different JavaScript engines, such as V8 (used by Chrome), SpiderMonkey (used by Firefox).

The current benchmark provides a simple and well-defined scenario that allows for a clear comparison between two functions with different parameter handling approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Default parameter vs Empty parameter (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Default parameter vs Empty parameter

Created: 9 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Default parameter

Empty parameter

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):