Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

benchmark: util._extend vs object.assign #7255

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

benchmark: util._extend vs object.assign #7255

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
a74addc
benchmark: `util._extend` vs `object.assign`
suryagh Jun 10, 2016
100a8be
benchmark: review comments
suryagh Jun 11, 2016
a3daa3b
benchmark: use proxy object as target
suryagh Jun 11, 2016
0e9260f
benchmark: use proxy object as target
suryagh Jun 20, 2016
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
40 changes: 40 additions & 0 deletions benchmark/misc/util-extend-vs-object-assign.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
'use strict';

const common = require('../common.js');
const util = require('util');
const v8 = require('v8');

const bench = common.createBenchmark(main, {
type: ['extend', 'assign'],
n: [10e4]
});

function main(conf) {
let fn;
const n = conf.n | 0;
let v8command;

if (conf.type === 'extend') {
fn = util._extend;
v8command = '%OptimizeFunctionOnNextCall(util._extend)';
Copy link
Contributor

@mscdex mscdex Jun 10, 2016 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know exactly how %OptimizeFunctionOnNextCall() works/is implemented, but I wonder if util._extend here should instead be fn?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this is the right way. It will get eval to the correct function reference by v8.

} else if (conf.type === 'assign') {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI: https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/benchmark/common.js#L255

the benchmark/common.js now has a method for handling the details of v8 optimization for you. e.g.

function myMethod(a,b) {
  /** ... **/
}
common.v8ForceOptimization(myMethod, 'a', 'b');
myMethod('a', 'b');

fn = Object.assign;
// Object.assign is built-in, cannot be optimized
v8command = '';
}

// Force-optimize the method to test so that the benchmark doesn't
// get disrupted by the optimizer kicking in halfway through.
for (var i = 0; i < conf.type.length * 10; i += 1)
fn({}, process.env);

v8.setFlagsFromString('--allow_natives_syntax');
eval(v8command);

var obj = new Proxy({}, { set: function(a, b, c) { return true; } });

bench.start();
for (var j = 0; j < n; j += 1)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

j++?

Copy link
Contributor

@mscdex mscdex Jun 20, 2016 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A ton of benchmarks use += 1 for the main loop already, so I'm not sure it's worth changing as far as consistency goes?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. 

var j = n:
while (j--) { ... }

Ok just kidding, it really doesn't matter though :P

fn(obj, process.env);
bench.end(n);
}