Benchmark: >= String x >= Number

Script Preparation code:

window.stringDate = '2021-04-18';
window.nowString = new Date().toISOString().substring(0, 10);

window.numberDate = Math.floor(new Date().getTime() / 86400000) * 86400000;
window.nowNumber = new Date().getTime()

Tests:

String
window.nowString >= window.stringDate;
Number
window.nowNumber >= window.numberDate;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String
Number

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros/cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures how fast JavaScript performs comparisons using string or number values. The script preparation code sets up some variables:

* `window.stringDate`: a string representing the date in format 'YYYY-MM-DD'
* `window.nowString`: a string representation of the current date in format 'YYYY-MM-DD' (substring of the full date)
* `window.numberDate`: an integer representing the number of seconds since January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 UTC
* `window.nowNumber`: the current time in milliseconds

The HTML preparation code is empty, which means no HTML elements or their properties are being tested.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **String**: Compares `window.nowString` with `window.stringDate`
2. **Number**: Compares `window.nowNumber` with `window.numberDate`

These tests check how quickly JavaScript can perform these comparisons.

**Comparison Options and Pros/Cons**

The comparison options being tested are the standard equality operators (`===`, `!==`) in JavaScript, which compare values using their primitive types (string, number, etc.).

Pros of using `===` or `!==`:

* They provide a clear and consistent way to perform comparisons.
* They are widely supported across different browsers and platforms.

Cons:

* They can lead to performance issues if the comparison involves large numbers or strings, as it may require creating additional objects or arrays to compare the values.
* In some cases, using `===` or `!==` might be slower than other approaches, depending on the specific JavaScript engine and implementation.

**Alternative Approaches**

Some alternative approaches for comparing values in JavaScript include:

* **Object equality**: Using `Object.is()` or `Object.compare()` (if available) to compare objects. This can be faster than using primitive type comparisons.
* **Primitive type comparison libraries**: Such as `fast-json-stamp` or `json-string-similarity`, which provide optimized functions for comparing JSON-like data. However, these libraries might not work with all JavaScript engines or platforms.

**Library and Syntax**

In the provided benchmark code, two libraries are used:

1. **`Math.floor()`**: a built-in JavaScript function that returns the largest integer less than or equal to the given number. It's used to convert `window.nowNumber` to an integer.
2. No special JS features or syntax is used in this benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

Some other considerations when working with benchmarks:

* **Test environment**: The test environment can significantly affect the results, as different browsers and platforms may execute JavaScript differently.
* **Garbage collection**: Garbage collection cycles can impact performance, especially if they occur during the benchmark execution.
* **Code optimization**: Code optimization techniques, such as minification or compression, can also affect performance.

Keep in mind that this is just a general overview of the benchmark definition and test cases. For more specific details or insights into JavaScript performance optimization, I'd be happy to help with further questions!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/111.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 111 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
String	3830782.8 Ops/sec
Number	3939974.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

>= String x >= Number (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: String vs Number

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

String

Number

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):