Benchmark: If vs Switch - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

const value = 'Cancelled';
const obj = { Rejected: true, Cancelled: true }

Tests:

ifTest1
function ifTest1() { if(value === 'Rejected' || value === 'Cancelled'){ return true; } }
ifTest2
function ifTest2() { if(value === 'Blue' || value === 'Red') { return false; } if(value === 'Rejected' || value === 'Cancelled'){ return true; } }
ifTest3
function ifTest3() { if(value === 'Rejected' || value === 'Cancelled'){ return true; } if(value === 'Blue' || value === 'Red') { return false; } }
switchTest1
function switchTest1() { switch(value) { case 'Rejected': return true; case 'Cancelled': return true; } }
switchTest2
function switchTest2() { switch(value) { case 'Rejected': return true; case 'Cancelled': return true; default: return false; } }
switchTest3
function switchTest3() { switch(value) { case 'Rejected': return true; case 'Blue': return false; case 'Red': return false; case 'Cancelled': return true; default: return false; } }
Object keys
function objectKeys() { return value in obj; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ifTest1
ifTest2
ifTest3
switchTest1
switchTest2
switchTest3
Object keys

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test suite for JavaScript, focusing on the performance comparison of two control structures: `if` statements and `switch` statements.

**Benchmark Options**

There are four main options being compared:

1. **If Statements with Multiple Conditions**: This option tests if statements that have multiple conditions in the `if` clause. The first condition is evaluated; if it's true, the code inside the `if` block is executed. If not, the next condition is checked. This approach can lead to slower performance due to the overhead of repeated evaluations.
2. **If Statements with Nested Conditions**: Similar to the previous option, but the conditions are nested within each other. This approach can also lead to slower performance due to the increased number of evaluations.
3. **Switch Statements with Multiple Cases**: This option tests switch statements that have multiple cases. Each case is evaluated; if a match is found, the code associated with that case is executed.
4. **Switch Statements with No Default Case**: In this approach, there is no default case to fall back on. The script will terminate as soon as a case is matched.

**Pros and Cons**

* **If Statements with Multiple Conditions**: This approach can lead to slower performance due to repeated evaluations of the conditions. However, it's often necessary for complex logic.
* **If Statements with Nested Conditions**: Similar to the previous option, but with increased overhead due to nested condition evaluations.
* **Switch Statements with Multiple Cases**: Switch statements are generally faster than if statements because they use a hash table lookup, which is O(1) on average. However, this approach requires careful consideration of case order and fall-through behavior.
* **Switch Statements with No Default Case**: This approach can be beneficial for performance-critical code paths where the script must terminate as soon as possible.

**Library Usage**

The `Object.keys()` function is used in one of the test cases. The purpose of this library is to return an array of valid own enumerable property names for that object. In the context of this benchmark, it's likely being used to compare the performance of different ways to check if a value exists as a key in an object.

**Special JS Features**

None of the provided test cases utilize any special JavaScript features or syntax. The code is straightforward and easy to understand.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to explore alternative approaches, here are some options:

* **Using `in` operator**: Instead of using `Object.keys()` or a switch statement, you could use the `in` operator to check if a value exists as a key in an object. This approach is generally faster than using `Object.keys()`.
* **Using a Map data structure**: If you're dealing with a large number of cases in your switch statement, you might consider using a Map data structure instead of a switch statement. Maps provide fast lookup and insertion operations.
* **Using just-in-time (JIT) compilation**: Some JavaScript engines, like V8, use JIT compilation to optimize performance-critical code paths. If you're interested in exploring this approach, you'd need to write custom JIT compiler code or use an existing implementation.

I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any further questions.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:65.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/65.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 65 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
ifTest1	1368116608.0 Ops/sec
ifTest2	1359396480.0 Ops/sec
ifTest3	1403181312.0 Ops/sec
switchTest1	1391033600.0 Ops/sec
switchTest2	1400368000.0 Ops/sec
switchTest3	1339207040.0 Ops/sec
Object keys	1338963584.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

If vs Switch (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ifTest1 vs ifTest2 vs ifTest3 vs switchTest1 vs switchTest2 vs switchTest3 vs Object keys

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ifTest1

ifTest2

ifTest3

switchTest1

switchTest2

switchTest3

Object keys

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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