Benchmark: Which falsy expression (! vs === 0) is faster?

Tests:

test not
var n = 0; while(true) { n++; if(!(n % 100000)) break; }
test equality
var n = 0; while(true) { n++; if((n % 100000) === 0) break; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test not
test equality

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/73.0.3683.103 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 73 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
test not	11016.6 Ops/sec
test equality	11014.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition, which outlines the test to be performed. In this case, the test is called "Which falsy expression (! vs === 0) is faster?" and asks whether replacing `!` with `=== 0` improves performance.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared in this benchmark:

1. `!(n % 100000)` (using the logical NOT operator)
2. `(n % 100000) === 0` (using the equality operator)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Option 1: `!(n % 100000)`**

* Pros:
	+ Shorter code
	+ May be faster due to the use of a single operator instead of two separate operations
* Cons:
	+ Less readable for some developers

**Option 2: `(n % 100000) === 0`**

* Pros:
	+ More readable for some developers
	+ Allows for easier modification or extension of the code
* Cons:
	+ Longer code
	+ May be slower due to the use of two separate operators

**Other Considerations**

The choice between these two options depends on personal preference, coding style, and performance requirements. Some developers may prefer the concise and efficient nature of `!(n % 100000)`, while others may prioritize readability.

It's also worth noting that modern JavaScript engines often optimize such operations to be equivalent in terms of performance.

**Library Usage**

None of the test cases use any libraries. The benchmark focuses solely on comparing two different syntaxes for a simple expression.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special feature or syntax being tested here. Both options are standard JavaScript syntax and should be supported by most modern browsers and interpreters.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you want to compare other approaches, such as using the `Number` function or a different type of comparison operator (e.g., `===`, `!=`, etc.), you can create new benchmark definitions. For example:

* Test: Using `Number(n % 100000)` instead of `(n % 100000) === 0`
* Benchmark Definition:
```javascript
var n = 0;
while(true) {
    if(Number(n % 100000) !== 0) break;
}
```

This approach would compare the performance of using the `Number` function to convert a value to a number, versus using the equality operator directly.

Keep in mind that each benchmark should be designed with specific goals and requirements in mind, taking into account factors like performance, readability, and maintainability.

Related benchmarks:

Which falsy expression (! vs === 0) is faster? (version: 0)

Is there a performance benefit to replacing ! with === 0?

Comparing performance of: test not vs test equality

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

test not

test equality

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):