Before, there are few articles that rose up saying that in terms of performance, Structs are powerful and could be used to define some of the code in place of the Class. Two of these are this one and this one.
Let's revisit these things with the latest Ruby version, 3.4.1, so that we can see whether this perspective still holds true.
class BenchmarkHashStruct
  class << self
    NUM = 1_000_000
    def measure
      array
      hash_str
      hash_sym
      klass
      struct
      data
    end
    def new_class
      @class ||= Class.new do
        attr_reader :name
        def initialize(name:)
          @name = name
        end
      end
    end
    def array
      time = Benchmark.measure do
        NUM.times do
          array = [Faker.name]
          hash[0]
        end
      end
      puts "array: #{time}" 
    end
    def hash_str
      time = Benchmark.measure do
        NUM.times do
          hash = { 'name' => Faker.name }
          hash['name']
        end
      end
      puts "hash_str: #{time}" 
    end
    def hash_sym
      time = Benchmark.measure do
        NUM.times do
          hash = { name: Faker.name }
          hash[:name]
        end
      end
      puts "hash_sym: #{time}" 
    end
    def struct
      time = Benchmark.measure do
        struct = Struct.new(:name) # Structs are only initialized once especially for large datasets
        NUM.times do |i|
          init = struct.new(name: Faker.name)
          init.name
        end
      end
      puts "struct: #{time}"
    end
    def klass
      time = Benchmark.measure do
        klass = new_class
        NUM.times do
          a = klass.new(name: Faker.name)
          a.name
        end
      end
      puts "class: #{time}"
    end
    def data
      time = Benchmark.measure do
        name_data = Data.define(:name)
        NUM.times do
          a = name_data.new(name: Faker.name)
          a.name
        end
      end
      puts "data: #{time}"
    end
  end
end
        In this file, we're simply trying to create benchmark measures for arrays, hashes with string keys, hashes with symbolized keys, structs, classes, and data. In a the lifetime of these objects, we understand that we instantiate them then we access the data we stored. So, we'll simulate only that for our tests. We use 1 million instances of these scenarios and see the results. The measure method will show all of these measurements together.
performance(dev)> BenchmarkHashStruct.measure
array:   0.124267   0.000000   0.124267 (  0.129573)
hash_str:   0.264137   0.000000   0.264137 (  0.275421)
hash_sym:   0.174082   0.000000   0.174082 (  0.181514)
class:   0.308020   0.000000   0.308020 (  0.321165)
struct:   0.336229   0.000000   0.336229 (  0.350576)
data:   0.345480   0.000000   0.345480 (  0.360232)
=> nil
performance(dev)> BenchmarkHashStruct.measure
array:   0.090669   0.000378   0.091047 (  0.094786)
hash_str:   0.264261   0.000000   0.264261 (  0.275104)
hash_sym:   0.172333   0.000000   0.172333 (  0.179407)
class:   0.311545   0.000060   0.311605 (  0.324390)
struct:   0.335436   0.000000   0.335436 (  0.349203)
data:   0.346124   0.000071   0.346195 (  0.360396)
=> nil
performance(dev)> BenchmarkHashStruct.measure
array:   0.088372   0.003872   0.092244 (  0.096181)
hash_str:   0.265748   0.000464   0.266212 (  0.277565)
hash_sym:   0.174393   0.000000   0.174393 (  0.181831)
class:   0.309411   0.000000   0.309411 (  0.322613)
struct:   0.346008   0.000000   0.346008 (  0.360760)
data:   0.344666   0.000000   0.344666 (  0.359361)
=> nil
performance(dev)> BenchmarkHashStruct.measure
array:   0.077396   0.000038   0.077434 (  0.080771)
hash_str:   0.242372   0.000140   0.242512 (  0.252853)
hash_sym:   0.159206   0.000000   0.159206 (  0.166007)
class:   0.273878   0.009250   0.283128 (  0.295201)
struct:   0.322791   0.000323   0.323114 (  0.336889)
data:   0.346099   0.000038   0.346137 (  0.360901)
=> nil
        I've run measure 4 times to account for any random changes that may have come and completely ensure of the performance of these tests. As expected, we see array at the top while symbolized hashes goes as a general second. We see that stringified hashes falls at the 3rd, with a huge gap when compared the the symbolized hashes. Then, when we look at class vs structs, it seems that structs have fallen a little bit behind compared to the classes. We could surmise that there is probably a performance boost done to classes in the recent patches.
Also, we could see that the Data object that was introduced in Ruby 3.2.0+ was falling behind the Struct object. This may be problematic since the Data object is basically a Struct that is immutable, so there's already disadvantages of using Data over Struct. We may still prefer Struct over Data considering that there's a bit of a performance bump over the Data.
There are 2 takeaways from this test. First, it's really important that we use symbolized hashes over stringified hashes as the former is 1.5x faster than the latter. Meanwhile, if not using hashes, it's better to use Classes over Structs, unlike what was previously encouraged. Classes are now 1.07x - 1.14x times faster than structs, so it's encouraged to keep using them.
Ps. if you have any questions
Ask here
