Benchmark: sdasdafewd - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:


console.log('');

Tests:

in
let obj = { a: 1, b: 2, c: 3 }; ('a' in obj);
hasown
let obj = { a: 1, b: 2, c: 3 }; obj.hasOwnProperty('a');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
in
hasown

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/91.0.4472.114 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 91 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
in	1003846656.0 Ops/sec
hasown	94216312.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into explaining the benchmark tests provided by MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The `Benchmark Definition` JSON represents the test being performed on the platform. It contains two lines of JavaScript code that are executed to measure performance. Let's break down each line:

* `let obj = { a: 1, b: 2, c: 3 };`: This line creates an object `obj` with three properties (`a`, `b`, and `c`) and initializes their values.
* `'a' in obj;` or `obj.hasOwnProperty('a');`: These lines check if the property 'a' exists in the object. The first one uses the `in` operator, which returns a boolean value indicating whether the property is present in the object. The second one uses the `hasOwnProperty()` method, which also checks for the presence of the property.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. Using the `in` operator (`'a' in obj;`)
2. Using the `hasOwnProperty()` method (`obj.hasOwnProperty('a');`)

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

* **Using the `in` operator**:
	+ Pros: Generally faster, as it uses a single operation to check for property presence.
	+ Cons: Can be less intuitive, as it returns a boolean value instead of a boolean-like object (e.g., `true`, `false`, `0`, or `undefined`).
* **Using the `hasOwnProperty()` method**:
	+ Pros: More explicit and readable, as it clearly indicates that the method is checking for property presence.
	+ Cons: Slower than the `in` operator, as it involves an additional method call.

In general, the `in` operator is preferred when performance is a concern, while the `hasOwnProperty()` method is used when readability and maintainability are prioritized.

**Library Usage**

Neither of the benchmark tests uses any external libraries. The JavaScript code is self-contained within the test definition.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special feature or syntax being tested in these benchmarks. They only use standard JavaScript operators and methods.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few:

* Using `Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty()` instead of `hasOwnProperty()`, as it provides the same functionality but with less function call overhead.
* Using `for...in` loops to iterate over the object's properties and check for presence, which can be more flexible than using the `in` operator or `hasOwnProperty()` method.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not provide significant performance improvements and are generally less readable or maintainable than the original approaches.

Related benchmarks:

sdasdafewd (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: in vs hasown

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

in

hasown

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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