Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
JavaScript spread operator with dirty object
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Common object vs Dirty object
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Common object
const firstObject = { sampleData: 'Hello world' } const secondObject = { moreData: 'foo bar' } const finalObject = { ...firstObject, ...secondObject };
Dirty object
Object.prototype.a = 5; Object.prototype.a = 6; Object.prototype.a = 7; const firstObject = { sampleData: 'Hello world' } const secondObject = { moreData: 'foo bar' } const finalObject = { ...firstObject, ...secondObject };
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Common object
Dirty object
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):
I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of JavaScript's spread operator (`...`) in creating new objects by merging two existing objects. The test cases are: 1. **Common object**: This test case creates a new object `finalObject` by spreading the properties of `firstObject` and `secondObject`. 2. **Dirty object**: This test case also merges two objects, but it first assigns values to `Object.prototype.a` in each iteration. **Options being compared** The benchmark compares the performance of creating a new object using the spread operator (`...`) with two different approaches: 1. **Common object**: Spreading the properties of `firstObject` and `secondObject` directly. 2. **Dirty object**: Assigning values to `Object.prototype.a` in each iteration, followed by spreading the properties. **Pros and Cons** * **Common object**: + Pros: Simple and straightforward approach, easy to understand and maintain. + Cons: May not be optimized for performance, as it involves creating multiple objects with similar properties. * **Dirty object**: + Pros: Can potentially optimize performance by reusing the `Object.prototype.a` assignment in each iteration. + Cons: More complex and harder to understand, especially when debugging. **Libraries and special JS features** Neither test case uses a library or any special JavaScript feature. The benchmark only relies on built-in JavaScript features. **Other considerations** When interpreting the benchmark results, consider the following: * **ExecutionsPerSecond**: This metric measures the number of iterations performed per second. A higher value indicates better performance. * **TestName**: Each test case has a unique name, allowing users to easily compare and analyze different scenarios. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for creating new objects by merging two existing objects include: 1. **Object.assign()**: This method is similar to the spread operator but returns the destination object, which might affect performance in certain scenarios. 2. **Object.create()**: This method creates a new object with a given prototype and initializes its properties using an object initializer function. Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on specific use cases and requirements. The benchmark results provided by MeasureThat.net can help users choose the most efficient approach for their particular scenario.
Related benchmarks:
Object.assign vs spread operator (without jquery)
Object.assign vs spread operator without jquery
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign performance - Kien Nguyen
Object.assign() vs spread operator (New object)
JavaScript spread operator vs Object.assign performance fixed 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?