Benchmark: Compare comparison with null or undefined

Compare comparison with null or undefined (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: value == null vs value == undefined vs value === null vs value === undefined vs value === null || value === undefined vs _.isNil(value) vs value != null vs value != undefined vs value !== null vs value !== undefined vs value !== null && value !== undefined vs !_.isNil(value)

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.10/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var value = { a: 123 }

Tests:

value == null
value == null
value == undefined
value == undefined
value === null
value === null
value === undefined
value === undefined
value === null || value === undefined
value === null || value === undefined
_.isNil(value)
_.isNil(value)
value != null
value != null
value != undefined
value != undefined
value !== null
value !== null
value !== undefined
value !== undefined
value !== null && value !== undefined
value !== null && value !== undefined
!_.isNil(value)
!_.isNil(value)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
value == null
value == undefined
value === null
value === undefined
value === null \|\| value === undefined
_.isNil(value)
value != null
value != undefined
value !== null
value !== undefined
value !== null && value !== undefined
!_.isNil(value)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 22 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
value == null	145920048.0 Ops/sec
value == undefined	128319120.0 Ops/sec
value === null	172606784.0 Ops/sec
value === undefined	135087568.0 Ops/sec
value === null \|\| value === undefined	140347008.0 Ops/sec
_.isNil(value)	95623896.0 Ops/sec
value != null	137243712.0 Ops/sec
value != undefined	105818416.0 Ops/sec
value !== null	155923744.0 Ops/sec
value !== undefined	143549680.0 Ops/sec
value !== null && value !== undefined	139671616.0 Ops/sec
!_.isNil(value)	94629896.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

On the provided JSON, multiple JavaScript microbenchmarks are defined to compare different conditions for `null` and `undefined`. The tests aim to determine which approach is faster in terms of executions per second.

The conditions being compared include:

* Equality operators (`==`, `===`) with `null` and `undefined`
* Inequality operators (`!=`, `!==`) with `null` and `undefined`
* Logical OR operator (`||`) with `null` and `undefined`
* Usage of the `isNil()` function from the Lodash library
* Negation operator (`!`) with `isNil()`

**Comparison of Equality Operators**

The tests compare the performance of using equality operators to check for `null` and `undefined`. The results show that:

* `value === null` is slower than `value === undefined`
* `value === undefined` is faster than `value !== undefined`

This suggests that checking for `undefined` is more efficient than checking for `null`.

**Comparison of Inequality Operators**

The tests compare the performance of using inequality operators to check for `null` and `undefined`. The results show that:

* `value !== null` is slower than `value !== undefined`
* `value !== undefined` is faster than `value === undefined`

This suggests that checking for `undefined` is more efficient than checking for `null`.

**Comparison of Logical OR Operator**

The tests compare the performance of using the logical OR operator (`||`) to combine a condition with `null` and `undefined`. The results show that:

* `value === null || value === undefined` is slower than `value !== null && value !== undefined`

This suggests that combining conditions using logical AND (`&&`) is more efficient than using logical OR (`||`).

**Comparison of Lodash's isNil() function**

The tests compare the performance of using Lodash's `isNil()` function to check for `null` and `undefined`. The results show that:

* `!isNil(value)` is slower than `value !== undefined`
* `isNil(value)` is faster than `value === null`

This suggests that checking for `null` using the `isNil()` function is more efficient than using equality operators.

**Comparison of Negation Operator**

The tests compare the performance of using the negation operator (`!`) with the `isNil()` function. The results show that:

* `!isNil(value)` is faster than `value !== undefined`
* `isNil(value)` is slower than `value === null`

This suggests that using the negation operator with `isNil()` can be more efficient, but it depends on the specific use case.

Overall, the tests suggest that checking for `undefined` is generally more efficient than checking for `null`, and combining conditions using logical AND (`&&`) is more efficient than using logical OR (`||`). Using Lodash's `isNil()` function can also be an efficient way to check for `null`.

Related benchmarks:

Compare comparison with null or undefined (version: 0)

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

value == null

value == undefined

value === null

value === undefined

value === null || value === undefined

_.isNil(value)

value != null

value != undefined

value !== null

value !== undefined

value !== null && value !== undefined

!_.isNil(value)

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):