Benchmark: value comparison vs. JSON.stringify

Script Preparation code:

oldField = {
    defaultValue: 'a'
}
newField = {
    defaultValue: 'b'
}

Tests:

value comparison
oldField.defaultValue !== newField.defaultValue
stringify comparison
JSON.stringify(oldField.defaultValue) !== JSON.stringify(newField.defaultValue)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
value comparison
stringify comparison

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined by two test cases:

1. "value comparison" (`oldField.defaultValue !== newField.defaultValue`)
2. "stringify comparison" (`JSON.stringify(oldField.defaultValue) !== JSON.stringify(newField.defaultValue)`)

These tests compare the values of two variables, `oldField.defaultValue` and `newField.defaultValue`, using both direct value comparison and stringification (converting the values to strings).

**Options being compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. Direct value comparison (`oldField.defaultValue !== newField.defaultValue`)
2. Stringification comparison (`JSON.stringify(oldField.defaultValue) !== JSON.stringify(newField.defaultValue)`)

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

**Direct Value Comparison**

* Pros:
	+ Faster, as it doesn't involve the overhead of string creation.
	+ May be more accurate for primitive values (e.g., numbers, strings).
* Cons:
	+ Can lead to unexpected behavior if the values are objects or have complex structures.

**Stringification Comparison**

* Pros:
	+ Guarantees equality by comparing the string representations of both values.
	+ Works with any data type that can be converted to a string (e.g., objects, arrays).
* Cons:
	+ Slower, as it involves creating and comparing strings.
	+ May not work as expected for certain edge cases (e.g., NaN, infinity).

**Library: JSON**

The `JSON` library is used in the "stringify comparison" test case. Its purpose is to convert JavaScript values to a string representation, which can be compared using the `!==` operator.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax: None mentioned**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in this benchmark that require explanation.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to implement this benchmark yourself, you might consider alternative approaches, such as:

1. Using a more modern comparison function like `===` (strict equality) for primitive values.
2. Implementing a custom comparison function that can handle objects and complex data structures.
3. Using a testing library or framework that provides built-in support for comparing values in different ways.

Keep in mind that the specific details of this benchmark are focused on comparing values using direct value comparison and stringification, so any alternative approaches would need to address these specific use cases.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 121 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
value comparison	8039991.5 Ops/sec
stringify comparison	3427519.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

value comparison vs. JSON.stringify (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: value comparison vs stringify comparison

Created: 8 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

value comparison

stringify comparison

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):