Benchmark result about get-value

[jonschlinkert]

prop in obj is slow

yes, true. But not that slow, and unfortunately it's necessary to be able to get non-enumerable prototype methods.

extra params a, b, c could be deleted

we can't remove that feature because it's used extensively in a number of projects. It allows you to dynamically create keys without having to slice/concat args then .join keys, thus it actually results in a speed increase "round trip".

var obj = {a: {b: {c: 'd'}}};

get(obj, ['a', 'b', 'c']);
// is the equivalent of
get(obj, 'a.b.c');

So, for example, let's say you want to create a custom get method where the key is always prefixed with a specific property path:

function Views() {
  this.views = {};
}

Views.prototype.set = function(key) {
  set(this, key, val);
  return this;
};

Views.prototype.get = function(key) {
  return get(this, key);
};

Views.prototype.getView = function(key) {
  // ignore the fact that we can just use `get(this.views,..)` for a moment
  // this allows us to not have to join `views` to `?`, which would need to
  // be split again later
  return this.get(['views', key]);
};

Of course, in this example you could easily just use get directly and do get(this.views, key), but it's not as easy when you're inheriting or using an instance of something with a get method. We do this a lot in libs like base, since it will always be faster than checking arguments and joining the keys, then splitting them again in get-value

Plus, in the benchmarks that code does not have much of an impact on speed, since it's explicit.

hope that makes sense.

[leesei]

I see. That's the reason why this lib is slower than dot-prop (around 40-50% in the benchmark test).
I suggest highlighting this feature in README.

---

I understand the feature but never considered that use case.
Then we should also add this feature to README. I would stress that only 3 params are supported (which would fit most use case).

[jonschlinkert]

(around 40-50% in the benchmark test).

Interesting, I get 2.8m ops/sec for this lib versus 3m ops/sec for dot prop. what version of node are you running?

I would stress that only 3 params are supported (which would fit most use case).

good idea. closing this, but I'll open a new one for docs

[leesei]

I'm using Node 5.1.
I can post more results later.

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Jon Schlinkert [email protected]
wrote:

Closed #5 #5.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5 (comment).

[leesei]

$ node -v; npm -v
v5.1.0
3.5.0

$ npm ls --depth 0
[email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
└── [email protected]

# master
$ node benchmark
#1: deep 
  current x 2,664,756 ops/sec ±0.56% (98 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 3,796,504 ops/sec ±0.47% (97 runs sampled)
  getobject x 261,985 ops/sec ±0.30% (99 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop
#2: shallow-long 
  current x 4,119,104 ops/sec ±0.39% (97 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 6,463,488 ops/sec ±0.28% (95 runs sampled)
  getobject x 840,169 ops/sec ±0.52% (95 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop
#3: shallow 
  current x 4,080,770 ops/sec ±0.20% (98 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 6,287,998 ops/sec ±0.54% (95 runs sampled)
  getobject x 727,382 ops/sec ±1.18% (90 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop

# commented `prop in obj`
$ node benchmark
#1: deep 
  current x 3,452,616 ops/sec ±0.47% (96 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 3,681,697 ops/sec ±0.52% (96 runs sampled)
  getobject x 270,249 ops/sec ±0.51% (99 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop
#2: shallow-long 
  current x 5,696,825 ops/sec ±0.52% (96 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 6,433,232 ops/sec ±0.42% (93 runs sampled)
  getobject x 869,137 ops/sec ±0.56% (96 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop
#3: shallow 
  current x 5,616,723 ops/sec ±0.37% (99 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 6,444,482 ops/sec ±0.67% (96 runs sampled)
  getobject x 924,384 ops/sec ±1.11% (93 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop

[leesei]

$ node -v; npm -v
v4.1.1
2.14.4

$ npm ls --depth 0
[email protected] 
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
├── [email protected]
└── [email protected]

# master
$ node benchmark
#1: deep 
  current x 2,569,185 ops/sec ±0.38% (97 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 3,583,916 ops/sec ±0.33% (99 runs sampled)
  getobject x 273,026 ops/sec ±0.16% (99 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop
#2: shallow-long 
  current x 3,950,008 ops/sec ±0.60% (92 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 6,304,140 ops/sec ±0.32% (96 runs sampled)
  getobject x 863,239 ops/sec ±0.36% (98 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop
#3: shallow 
  current x 3,842,925 ops/sec ±0.14% (100 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 6,284,504 ops/sec ±0.42% (100 runs sampled)
  getobject x 918,652 ops/sec ±0.30% (99 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop

# commented `prop in obj`
$ node benchmark
#1: deep 
  current x 3,213,149 ops/sec ±0.45% (96 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 3,587,530 ops/sec ±0.55% (96 runs sampled)
  getobject x 273,838 ops/sec ±0.36% (100 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop
#2: shallow-long 
  current x 5,369,434 ops/sec ±0.38% (96 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 5,904,589 ops/sec ±0.31% (97 runs sampled)
  getobject x 873,513 ops/sec ±0.66% (94 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop
#3: shallow 
  current x 5,412,105 ops/sec ±0.26% (91 runs sampled)
  dot-prop x 6,230,873 ops/sec ±0.76% (96 runs sampled)
  getobject x 890,037 ops/sec ±0.38% (96 runs sampled)

  fastest is dot-prop

[jonschlinkert]

Thanks for posting it. Clearly I like getting the best performance possible, or I wouldn't waste my time with adding benchmarks. But IMHO it's more important to actually pass the unit tests, and last time I checked dot-prop failed several of them