return ("-8A" > 0 || 0 > "-8A");
return (NaN > 0 || 0 > NaN);
return (6 > 0 || 0 > 6);
return isNaN("-8A");
return isNaN(NaN);
return isNaN(6);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Custom not number | |
Custom NaN | |
Custom number | |
isNan not number | |
isNan NaN | |
isNaN number |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Custom not number | 867582912.0 Ops/sec |
Custom NaN | 2513268.5 Ops/sec |
Custom number | 869474048.0 Ops/sec |
isNan not number | 3114765.8 Ops/sec |
isNan NaN | 2138505.5 Ops/sec |
isNaN number | 3995744.0 Ops/sec |
What is tested in the provided JSON?
The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net, which compares two approaches: using the native isNaN()
function and creating a custom implementation of isNaN()
.
The benchmark tests the performance of these two approaches for different scenarios:
Options compared:
There are two options being compared:
isNaN()
function: This uses the built-in isNaN()
function in JavaScript, which checks if a value is not a number.isNaN()
: This creates a custom implementation of isNaN()
using simple conditional statements.Pros and Cons:
isNaN()
function:isNaN()
:Library usage:
There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided JSON, but isNaN()
is a built-in function in JavaScript.
Special JS features or syntax:
The benchmark does not mention any special JavaScript features or syntax. It only uses standard JavaScript syntax for testing the performance of native functions and custom implementations.
Alternative approaches:
Other alternatives to create a custom implementation of isNaN()
could include:
However, these alternatives might not be included in the benchmark, and their performance compared to the native isNaN()
function would need to be evaluated.