Rudimentary benchmarking of closure-based vs metatable-based OOP in Lua

bench.lua

-- Usage: luajit bench.lua (closures|metatables)
local Foobar = require((...))
for _ = 1, 5 do
	local t = os.clock()
	local sum = 0
	for i = 1, 1e6 do
		sum = sum + Foobar("foo", i, "baz"):get_bar()
	end
	print("dt", os.clock() - t, "sum", sum)
end

closures.lua

return function(foo, bar, baz)
	local self = {}
	-- This could be slightly optimized by putting them in a table constructor
	function self.get_foo() return foo end
	function self.set_foo(new_foo) foo = new_foo end
	function self.get_bar() return bar end
	function self.set_bar(new_bar) bar = new_bar end
	function self.get_baz() return baz end
	function self.set_baz(new_baz) baz = new_baz end
	function self.frobnicate() print(foo, bar, baz) end
	return self
end

metatables.lua

local foobar = {}
function foobar:get_foo() return self.foo end
function foobar:set_foo(new_foo) self.foo = new_foo end
function foobar:get_bar() return self.bar end
function foobar:set_bar(new_bar) self.bar = new_bar end
function foobar:get_baz() return self.baz end
function foobar:setBaz(new_baz) self.baz = new_baz end
function foobar:frobnicate() print(self.foo, self.bar, self.baz) end
local mt = {__index = foobar}
return function(foo, bar, baz)
	return setmetatable({foo = foo, bar = bar, baz = baz}, mt)
end