Benchmark: lodash isNil vs ! Operator

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var a = null;
var b = undefined;
var c = NaN;
var d = false;
var e = 'a';
var f = 0;
var g = {};

Tests:

lodash isNil
_.isNil(a); _.isNil(b); _.isNil(c); _.isNil(d); _.isNil(e); _.isNil(f); _.isNil(g)
! Operator
function isNil(value){ return !value; } isNil(a); isNil(b); isNil(c); isNil(d); isNil(e); isNil(f); isNil(g);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash isNil
! Operator

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript benchmark test case on MeasureThat.net, where the goal is to compare the performance of two approaches: using the Lodash library's `isNil` function and the unary negation operator (`!`) in isolation.

**Benchmark Test Case**

The test case involves creating an array of variables with different values (null, undefined, NaN, false, string, number, object) and then calling the `isNil` function on each variable using both approaches:

* Lodash's `isNil`: The test uses the Lodash library's `isNil` function to check if a value is null or undefined.
* Unary Negation Operator (`!`): The test defines a custom `isNil` function that simply returns the negation of the input value.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of two options:

1. **Lodash's `isNil`**: Using the Lodash library to perform null checks.
2. **Unary Negation Operator (`!`)**: Using a simple custom function with a unary negation operator to check for null or undefined values.

**Pros and Cons**

### Lodash's `isNil`

Pros:

* The Lodash library provides a robust and tested implementation of the `isNil` function, which can be relied upon for accuracy.
* It is designed to work seamlessly with other Lodash functions, making it a convenient choice for many use cases.

Cons:

* Requires an external dependency (the Lodash library), which may not be ideal for all projects or environments.
* May introduce overhead due to the additional function call and potential optimizations in the browser's engine.

### Unary Negation Operator (`!`)

Pros:

* No additional dependencies are required, making it a lightweight and self-contained solution.
* Can potentially avoid optimization overhead by simply returning the negation of the value.

Cons:

* The custom implementation may not be as robust or tested as the Lodash library's `isNil`.
* May introduce subtle bugs or edge cases if not implemented carefully.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks such as array manipulation, object manipulation, and more. The `isNil` function is one of its core utility functions, designed to check if a value is null or undefined.

In this benchmark, the Lodash library's `isNil` function is used to provide a baseline comparison for the unary negation operator (`!`). By using an external library, the test ensures that any performance differences can be attributed to the specific implementation rather than the framework or environment.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two simple implementations for null checks.

**Other Alternatives**

Other alternatives for null checking could include:

* Using a `typeof` check with `null` and `undefined`
* Implementing a custom function using bitwise operations (e.g., `x !== x`)
* Utilizing modern JavaScript features like Optional Chaining (`?.`) or Nullish Coalescing (`??`)

However, these alternatives may not be as straightforward to implement or may have different performance characteristics compared to the Lodash library's `isNil`.

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/113.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 113 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash isNil	1551564.5 Ops/sec
! Operator	4886040.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

lodash isNil vs ! Operator (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash isNil vs ! Operator

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

lodash isNil

! Operator

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):