var test = 'test'
if (test === 'test1') {
return 1;
}
if (test === 'test2') {
return 2;
}
if (test === 'test3') {
return 3;
}
if (test === 'test4') {
return 4;
}
if (test === 'test5') {
return 5;
}
if (test === 'test1') {
return 1;
} else if (test === 'test2') {
return 2;
} else if (test === 'test3') {
return 3;
} else if (test === 'test4') {
return 4;
} else if (test === 'test5') {
return 5;
}
switch (test) {
case 'test1':
return 1;
case 'test2':
return 2;
case 'test3':
return 3;
case 'test4':
return 4;
case 'test5':
return 5;
}
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
if/if | |
if/else if | |
switch case |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
if/if | 179744976.0 Ops/sec |
if/else if | 169341712.0 Ops/sec |
switch case | 186047712.0 Ops/sec |
Measuring the performance of different JavaScript control flow structures is crucial for optimizing code and ensuring efficient execution.
The provided benchmark compares three approaches:
if
statements: This approach uses separate conditional checks for each possible value of the test
variable. The code checks if test
equals one of the five values, and returns a corresponding result.if/else if
chain: In this approach, the code uses an if/else if
chain to check multiple conditions in a single sequence. The conditions are evaluated from top to bottom, and each condition is short-circuited if it's not met.switch
statement: This approach uses a switch
statement to check the value of test
against multiple cases. Each case has an associated code block that will be executed if the test value matches.Pros and Cons:
if
statements:if/else if
chain:switch
statement:if/else if
chains for large numbers of cases, as it uses a jump table.The switch
statement is currently outperforming both the if/if
and if/else if
approaches in this benchmark. This makes sense, given that switch
statements can use a jump table to quickly determine which case to execute.
Library usage:
There are no libraries used in the provided benchmark code. However, some JavaScript implementations might use internal optimizations or built-in functions that could affect performance.
Special JavaScript features/syntax:
This benchmark doesn't explicitly test any special JavaScript features or syntax, such as async/await, generators, or arrow functions. It primarily focuses on the control flow structures themselves.
Alternative approaches:
Some alternative approaches to consider:
ternary operator
(conditional operator): Instead of using multiple if
statements or an if/else if
chain, you could use a ternary operator to simplify the code.Object.keys()
and Array.prototype.forEach()
: For large datasets, you might consider using an object with keys representing values and iterating over it using Array.prototype.forEach()
. This approach would eliminate the need for explicit loops or conditional checks.const
and let
optimization: In some cases, using const
instead of var
can help optimize performance by reducing the time it takes to reassign variables.However, these alternative approaches are not directly related to the control flow structures being tested in this benchmark.