const testObj = { prop1: false, prop2: false, prop3: true};
const orResult = testObj.prop1 || testObj.prop2 || testObj.prop3;
const testObj = { prop1: 'val1', prop2: 'val2', prop3: 'val3'};
['prop1', 'prop2', 'prop3'].some(val => testObj[val]);
const testObj = { prop1: 'val1', prop2: 'val2', prop3: 'val3'};
[testObj.prop1, testObj.prop2, testObj.prop3].some(val => val);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
or | |
some 1 | |
some 2 |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
or | 172305344.0 Ops/sec |
some 1 | 141097568.0 Ops/sec |
some 2 | 150787376.0 Ops/sec |
Measuring performance is a crucial aspect of software development, and having a reliable tool like MeasureThat.net helps ensure that your code runs efficiently across different browsers and devices.
The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition for three individual test cases:
||
) in JavaScript. The testObj
object contains three properties: prop1
, prop2
, and prop3
. Two of these properties are set to false
, while one is set to true
. The benchmark definition uses the OR operator to check if any of these properties are truthy, and measures how many executions per second this operation yields.In terms of options compared:
||
): This is a basic logical operator in JavaScript that returns true
if at least one operand is true. It's often used for conditional statements or simple checks.some()
method is another way to check for truthiness in an array. Unlike the OR operator, it doesn't short-circuit and will iterate over all elements until a truthy value is found.Pros and Cons of these approaches:
OR Operator (||
):
* Pros: Simple to implement, straightforward logic.
* Cons: Can be slow for large arrays due to its sequential nature.
Some Method: * Pros: More efficient than the OR operator in many cases, as it stops iterating once a truthy value is found. * Cons: Requires an array and can be more complex to implement.
Other considerations:
testObj
object or array. This can impact performance depending on the size of the data.Regarding library usage, there's no explicit mention of any libraries in the provided benchmark definition.
As for special JavaScript features or syntax, there isn't anything notable mentioned in this specific benchmark. However, if you're interested in exploring other advanced features like async/await, generators, or WebAssembly, those would require separate benchmark definitions and testing approaches.
For comparison with MeasureThat.net, here are some alternatives: