Benchmark: Objekt je prázdný? 2

Script Preparation code:

xxx = {}

Tests:

===
Object.keys(xxx) === 0
==
Object.keys(xxx) == 0
Boolean
Boolean(Object.keys(xxx)[0])
!==
Object.keys(xxx) !== 0

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
===
==
Boolean
!==

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 JSON data and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a simple JavaScript statement that checks if an object is empty (`Object.keys(xxx) === 0`). The variable `xxx` is initialized with an empty object using the line `"xxx = {}"` in the script preparation code. This creates an object without any properties, making it effectively empty.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares four different approaches to check if the object is empty:

1. **Strict Equality (`===`)**: `Object.keys(xxx) === 0`
2. **Loose Equality (`==`)`: `Object.keys(xxx) == 0`
3. **Boolean Casting**: `Boolean(Object.keys(xxx)[0])`
4. **Non-Strict Equality (`!==`)`: `Object.keys(xxx) !== 0`

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Strict Equality (`===`)**:
	* Pros: Most accurate, as it checks for both value and type equality.
	* Cons: Can be slower due to the additional check for type equality.
2. **Loose Equality (`==`)**:
	* Pros: Faster, as it only checks for value equality.
	* Cons: Inaccurate if the object has a `toString()` method that returns a non-empty string representation of an empty object (e.g., `{}`).
3. **Boolean Casting**: `Boolean(Object.keys(xxx)[0])`
	* Pros: Fast and accurate, as it simply converts the result to a boolean value.
	* Cons: May not work as expected if `Object.keys()` returns an array with only one element (which would be converted to `true`), but you still want to check for an empty object.
4. **Non-Strict Equality (`!==`)**:
	* Pros: Faster, as it only checks for value inequality.
	* Cons: Inaccurate if the object is actually empty, as it will return `false`.

**Library and Special JS Features**

None of the options use a specific library or special JavaScript features.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark uses an empty object (`xxx`) as the test subject. This simplifies the comparison but may not accurately represent real-world scenarios where objects are often more complex.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, consider using:

* `Object.isEmpty()` (ES6+): A built-in method that checks if an object is empty.
* Custom implementations using `Object.keys()` and conditional statements.
* Alternative data structures, such as `Map` or `Set`, which may offer better performance characteristics for certain use cases.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your specific requirements, performance constraints, and JavaScript version support.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
===	2839384.8 Ops/sec
==	1784105.0 Ops/sec
Boolean	1941478.4 Ops/sec
!==	2813979.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Objekt je prázdný? 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: === vs == vs Boolean vs !==

Created: 10 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

===

==

Boolean

!==

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):