Benchmark: comparing coercion string vs number

Script Preparation code:

var table = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15];
var ids = ["1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9", "10", "11", "12", "13", "14", "15", "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9", "10", "11", "12", "13", "14", "15", "1", "2", "3", "4", "5", "6", "7", "8", "9", "10", "11", "12", "13", "14", "15"];

Tests:

Comparing Number ===
for (let i = 0; i < table.length; i++){ const areEqual = table[i] === Number(ids[i]); }
Comparing maping ===
ids.map(Number).forEach((id) => { const areEqual = table[0] === id; });
Comparing ==
for (let i = 0; i < table.length; i++){ if (ids[i]) { const areEqual = table[i] == ids[i]; } }
Comparing no mapping ==
ids.forEach((id) => { if (id) { const areEqual = table[0] == id; } });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Comparing Number ===
Comparing maping ===
Comparing ==
Comparing no mapping ==

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 24 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three different ways to check for equality between two arrays: `table` (containing numbers) and `ids` (containing strings).

**Test Cases**

There are four test cases:

1. **Comparing Number ===**: This test case uses the `===` operator to compare each element in `table` with its corresponding element in `ids`, which has been converted to a number using `Number()`.
2. **Comparing mapping ===**: This test case uses the `map()` function to convert all elements in `ids` to numbers, and then compares each element in `table` with the first element in the resulting array.
3. **Comparing =** : This test case uses the `==` operator (a loose equality check) to compare each element in `table` with its corresponding element in `ids`.
4. **Comparing no mapping**: This test case does not use any explicit conversion or mapping functions, it simply compares each element in `table` with its corresponding element in `ids`, but without using the `===` operator.

**Library:**

None of the test cases explicitly use a JavaScript library.

**JavaScript Features/Syntax:**

The benchmark uses the following modern JavaScript features:

* `let` and `const` for variable declarations
* Template literals (`\r\n`) for multi-line strings
* The spread operator (`...`) is not used in this benchmark.
* The `map()` function is used to convert elements in `ids` to numbers.

**Options Compared:**

The four test cases compare the performance of the following options:

1. **Using `===` (strict equality check)**: This option checks for both value and type equality between two values.
2. **Using `==` (loose equality check)**: This option only checks for value equality, but not type equality.
3. **Converting elements to numbers using `Number()`**: This option converts all elements in `ids` to numbers before comparing them with the corresponding elements in `table`.
4. **No explicit conversion or mapping**: This option simply compares each element in `table` with its corresponding element in `ids`, without any explicit conversion.

**Pros and Cons:**

Here are some pros and cons for each option:

* **Using `===` (strict equality check)**:
	+ Pros: Ensures type safety and prevents type-related bugs.
	+ Cons: Can be slower due to the additional type checking.
* **Using `==` (loose equality check)**:
	+ Pros: Faster than `===`, since it doesn't perform type checking.
	+ Cons: Can lead to type-related bugs if not used carefully.
* **Converting elements to numbers using `Number()`**:
	+ Pros: Allows for simple and readable code, and is often faster than using `===`.
	+ Cons: Can be slower for large arrays or complex data structures, since it involves an additional conversion step.
* **No explicit conversion or mapping**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster and more efficient, since no additional conversions are needed.
	+ Cons: May lead to unexpected behavior if not used carefully, especially when dealing with different data types.

**Other Alternatives:**

There are other alternatives for comparing elements in JavaScript, such as using regular expressions or string manipulation functions. However, these approaches may be slower and less efficient than the options compared in this benchmark.

Overall, the benchmark provides a useful comparison of four different ways to check for equality between two arrays, allowing users to choose the best approach based on their specific use case and performance requirements.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 127 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Comparing Number ===	133605.8 Ops/sec
Comparing maping ===	503441.5 Ops/sec
Comparing ==	161039.1 Ops/sec
Comparing no mapping ==	575913.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

comparing coercion string vs number (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Comparing Number === vs Comparing maping === vs Comparing == vs Comparing no mapping ==

Created: 3 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Comparing Number ===

Comparing maping ===

Comparing ==

Comparing no mapping ==

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 24 days ago):