Benchmark: Boolean vs !!3 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var newArr = ['1', '2', '3', '4'];

Tests:

Test1
!!newArr.length
Test2
newArr.length !== 0

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Test1
Test2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined in JSON format, which includes:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark, which is "Boolean vs !!3".
* `Description`: An empty description, which suggests that there might be a brief explanation or context about this specific test case, but it's not provided.
* `Script Preparation Code`:
```javascript
var newArr = ['1', '2', '3', '4'];
```
This code initializes an array `newArr` with four elements. The purpose of this code snippet is to create a variable that will be used in the benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

The test cases are defined as follows:
```json
[
  {
    "Benchmark Definition": "!!newArr.length",
    "Test Name": "Test1"
  },
  {
    "Benchmark Definition": "newArr.length !== 0",
    "Test Name": "Test2"
  }
]
```
These test cases compare the results of two expressions:

1. `!!newArr.length` (Test 1)
2. `newArr.length !== 0` (Test 2)

**What's being tested?**

In essence, these tests are comparing the performance of boolean evaluation in JavaScript. Specifically, they're testing whether the use of the double-bang operator (`!!`) makes a difference in terms of execution speed compared to a simple comparison using `!==`.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Boolean Evaluation with `!!`**: The double-bang operator is used to convert the result of `newArr.length` to a boolean value.
2. **Simple Comparison without `!!`**: A direct comparison is made between `newArr.length` and 0 using `!==`.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Boolean Evaluation with `!!`**:
	+ Pros: Can be more readable and maintainable, especially in cases where the value is not guaranteed to be a number.
	+ Cons: May incur additional overhead due to the double-bang operation, which can lead to slower execution times.
* **Simple Comparison without `!!`**:
	+ Pros: Typically faster, as it avoids the unnecessary conversion to a boolean value.
	+ Cons: May make the code less readable, especially for those not familiar with the `!==` operator.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

In this case, there is no explicit library being used in the benchmark. However, the use of the double-bang operator (`!!`) is a special JavaScript feature that can be useful when working with values that need to be converted to boolean expressions.

**Other Considerations**

When designing benchmarks like this one, it's essential to consider factors such as:

* **Language and Engine Variants**: The benchmark should test against different language variants (e.g., ES5, ES6) and browser engines (e.g., Chrome, Firefox).
* **Device Platforms**: Testing on various device platforms can help ensure that the results are representative of real-world use cases.
* **Memory Allocation and Garbage Collection**: These factors can impact performance, so it's essential to include them in the benchmarking process.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative benchmarks or testing frameworks, consider:

* V8 Benchmark Suite: A set of benchmarks specifically designed to measure JavaScript engine performance.
* JS Perf: A tool that provides detailed information about JavaScript execution times and helps identify performance bottlenecks.
* Benchmarking libraries like Benchmark.js or js-benchmark: These libraries provide a simple way to create and run benchmarks in Node.js.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 24 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/130.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Test1	14787980.0 Ops/sec
Test2	14408382.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Boolean vs !!3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Test1 vs Test2

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Test1

Test2

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):