Benchmark: !!number vs (number !== 0)

Script Preparation code:

var N = 1000000

Tests:

!!
var sum = 0 for(let i = 0; i < N; i++) { if (!!(i & 0xFF)) sum++ }
!== 0
var sum = 0 for(let i = 0; i < N; i++) { if((i & 0xFF) !== 0) sum++ }
direct
var sum = 0 for(let i = 0; i < N; i++) { if(i & 0xFF) sum++ }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
!!
!== 0
direct

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of different approaches for incrementing a variable within a loop. The three test cases use the `!!` operator, strict inequality (`!== 0`), and direct bit manipulation to compare the value of a variable with zero or not-zero.

**Test Cases**

1. **!! Operator**
	* Benchmark Definition: `var sum = 0for(let i = 0; i < N; i++) { if (!!(i & 0xFF)) sum++ }`
	* Purpose: Tests the performance of using the double-bang operator (`!!`) to convert a boolean value to a number (1 or 0).
2. **Strict Inequality**
	* Benchmark Definition: `var sum = 0for(let i = 0; i < N; i++) { if((i & 0xFF) !== 0) sum++ }`
	* Purpose: Tests the performance of using strict inequality (`!==`) to check if a value is not equal to zero.
3. **Direct Bit Manipulation**
	* Benchmark Definition: `var sum = 0for(let i = 0; i < N; i++) { if(i & 0xFF) sum++ }`
	* Purpose: Tests the performance of using direct bit manipulation (bitwise AND with a mask) to check if a value is not equal to zero.

**Library and Special Features**

None of the test cases use any libraries. However, they do utilize special JavaScript features:

1. **Bitwise Operators**: All three test cases use bitwise operators (`&`, `!=`) to manipulate bits.
2. **For Loops with Loop Variables**: All three test cases use for loops with loop variables (in this case, a single variable `i`).
3. **Integer Arithmetic**: All three test cases involve integer arithmetic operations (addition and comparison).

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **!! Operator**
	* Pros: Concise and expressive; avoids explicit type checking.
	* Cons: May be slower due to boxing/unboxing or other overheads.
2. **Strict Inequality**
	* Pros: Explicitly checks for non-zero value, which can improve performance in some cases.
	* Cons: More verbose than the `!!` operator, may introduce additional overhead.
3. **Direct Bit Manipulation**
	* Pros: Fast and efficient; avoids explicit type checking.
	* Cons: May be less readable or maintainable due to its simplicity.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches, consider:

1. Using the `Number` function with a radix argument (e.g., `Number(i) === 0`) instead of `!!`.
2. Utilizing the `Boolean` value directly (`i` as a boolean).
3. Employing conditional compilation or runtime checks to handle edge cases.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be relevant depending on your specific use case and performance requirements.

In summary, the benchmark compares three different approaches for incrementing a variable within a loop. The `!!` operator is compared with strict inequality (`!== 0`) and direct bit manipulation. Each approach has its pros and cons, and alternative solutions can be considered based on specific use cases and performance requirements.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/110.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 110 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
!!	1526.3 Ops/sec
!== 0	1525.4 Ops/sec
direct	1539.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

!!number vs (number !== 0) (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: !! vs !== 0 vs direct

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

!!

!== 0

direct

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):