Benchmark: Multiple conditions vs nested conditions

Script Preparation code:

function Monster()
{
	this.one = true;
  	this.two = false;
}

var monster = new Monster();

Tests:

Multiple conditions
if (monster.one === true && monster.two === false) { return true; }
Nested conditions
if (monster.one === true) { if (monster.two === false) { return true; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Multiple conditions
Nested conditions

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:48.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/48.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 48 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Multiple conditions	115761064.0 Ops/sec
Nested conditions	106247680.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark titled "Multiple conditions vs nested conditions". This benchmark compares two different approaches to evaluate a conditional statement.

**Script Preparation Code:**

The script preparation code is a simple JavaScript function `Monster` that creates an object with two properties, `one` and `two`, initialized as `true` and `false`, respectively. This setup allows us to focus on the conditional statements without any additional complexity.

```javascript
function Monster() {
  this.one = true;
  this.two = false;
}
```

**Comparison:**

The benchmark tests two different approaches:

1. **Multiple conditions**: The first test case evaluates a single conditional statement using `if (monster.one === true && monster.two === false)`. This approach checks both conditions before returning the result.
2. **Nested conditions**: The second test case uses a nested `if` statement: `if (monster.one === true) { if (monster.two === false) { return true; } }`. Here, the inner condition is evaluated only when the outer condition is true.

**Pros and Cons:**

*   **Multiple conditions**:
    *   Pros:
        *   Simple and straightforward implementation.
        *   Easy to understand and reason about.
    *   Cons:
        *   May be slower due to redundant checks (e.g., `monster.one === true`).
*   **Nested conditions**:
    *   Pros:
        *   Efficient for cases where only one condition needs to be checked.
    *   Cons:
        *   More complex implementation, which can lead to errors if not implemented correctly.

Other considerations:

*   Both approaches have their trade-offs in terms of readability, maintainability, and performance. The best approach depends on the specific use case and requirements.
*   In general, using multiple conditions is a good practice when there are many variables involved or when only one condition needs to be checked.

**Library and Special JS Features:**

There is no library used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some browsers might optimize JavaScript engine implementations for certain conditional statements (e.g., `if` with a single condition).

**Alternatives:**

If you were to create a similar benchmark, here are some alternatives:

1.  Use different conditional operators or expressions:
    *   Instead of `if (monster.one === true && monster.two === false)`, use `if ((monster.one || !monster.two))`.
2.  Compare with other logic gates like XOR (`^`) or bitwise operations.
3.  Incorporate more complex conditional statements, such as nested ternary operators or switch statements.

**Test Preparation Code:**

The provided JSON does not include a test preparation code. In general, the test preparation code would involve setting up any necessary variables, data structures, or other resources required for the benchmark. For this example, the `Monster` function is sufficient to create an object with the desired properties.

Keep in mind that the specific test preparation code might vary depending on the requirements of your benchmark and the libraries you plan to use.

Related benchmarks:

Multiple conditions vs nested conditions (version: 0)

What is faster?

Comparing performance of: Multiple conditions vs Nested conditions

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Multiple conditions

Nested conditions

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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