Benchmark: Is string empty - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

not string
function isEmpty(string) { return !string; } const text = 'This is an example of a non empty string'; const empty = ''; const test1 = isEmpty(text); const test2 = isEmpty(empty);
length is 0
function isEmpty(string) { return string.length === 0; } const text = 'This is an example of a non empty string'; const empty = ''; const test1 = isEmpty(text); const test2 = isEmpty(empty);
not length
function isEmpty(string) { return !string.length; } const text = 'This is an example of a non empty string'; const empty = ''; const test1 = isEmpty(text); const test2 = isEmpty(empty);
string equals empty string
function isEmpty(string) { return string === ''; } const text = 'This is an example of a non empty string'; const empty = ''; const test1 = isEmpty(text); const test2 = isEmpty(empty);
string soft equals empty string
function isEmpty(string) { return string == ''; } const text = 'This is an example of a non empty string'; const empty = ''; const test1 = isEmpty(text); const test2 = isEmpty(empty);
not boolean
function isEmpty(string) { return !Boolean(string); } const text = 'This is an example of a non empty string'; const empty = ''; const test1 = isEmpty(text); const test2 = isEmpty(empty);
length soft equals 0
function isEmpty(string) { return string.length == 0; } const text = 'This is an example of a non empty string'; const empty = ''; const test1 = isEmpty(text); const test2 = isEmpty(empty);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
not string
length is 0
not length
string equals empty string
string soft equals empty string
not boolean
length soft equals 0

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark.

**What is tested?**

The benchmark tests different ways of checking if a string is empty. The tests are designed to measure the performance and consistency of various approaches to this common operation.

**Options compared:**

1. `return !string;` (Test case 1, "not string")
2. `return string.length === 0;` (Test case 2, "length is 0")
3. `return !string.length;` (Test case 3, "not length")
4. `return string === '';` (Test case 4, "string equals empty string")
5. `return string == '';` (Test case 5, "string soft equals empty string") (Note: This is a deprecated and non-standard way of comparing strings)
6. `return !Boolean(string);` (Test case 6, "not boolean")

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. `return !string;`:
	* Pros: Simple and concise
	* Cons: Can be slower due to the unnecessary creation of a new boolean value
2. `return string.length === 0;`:
	* Pros: Accurate and efficient for strings of any length
	* Cons: Requires accessing the `length` property, which may incur additional overhead
3. `return !string.length;`:
	* Pros: Similar to `return !string;`, but avoids creating a new boolean value
	* Cons: Less readable and less explicit than `return !string;`
4. `return string === '';`:
	* Pros: Simple and easy to understand
	* Cons: May be slower due to the use of the loose comparison operator (`===`)
5. `return string == '';`:
	* Pros: Widely supported in older browsers, but not recommended for new development
	* Cons: Destructive, as it returns a value that can be misleading if not handled properly
6. `return !Boolean(string);`:
	* Pros: Avoids explicit length checks or comparisons with an empty string
	* Cons: Less readable and less intuitive than other approaches

**Observations from the benchmark results:**

The results show that `return string.length === 0;` is generally the fastest approach, followed closely by `return !string;`. The performance differences between these approaches are relatively small, but `return string.length === 0;` offers a slight advantage in terms of consistency and accuracy.

The slower performers, `return string == '';` and `return string == ''`, are largely due to the use of the loose comparison operator (`==`). This approach is not recommended for new development, as it can lead to unexpected results in certain situations.

**Conclusion:**

In conclusion, while all approaches have their trade-offs, `return string.length === 0;` and `return !string;` are generally the best choices for checking if a string is empty. The latter approach offers an additional layer of explicitness and accuracy, making it a more reliable choice in most situations.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 123 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
not string	227150784.0 Ops/sec
length is 0	228810224.0 Ops/sec
not length	235743184.0 Ops/sec
string equals empty string	237440144.0 Ops/sec
string soft equals empty string	228026368.0 Ops/sec
not boolean	11749021.0 Ops/sec
length soft equals 0	244550032.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Is string empty (version: 0)

Different ways of checking if string is empty

Comparing performance of: not string vs length is 0 vs not length vs string equals empty string vs string soft equals empty string vs not boolean vs length soft equals 0

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

not string

length is 0

not length

string equals empty string

string soft equals empty string

not boolean

length soft equals 0

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):