Benchmark: comparing in and hasownproperty

Tests:

hasOwnProperty
var obj = { test: 1 }; console.log(obj.hasOwnProperty('toString'));
in
var obj = { test: 1 }; console.log('toString' in obj);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
hasOwnProperty
in

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**What is being tested?**

The provided benchmark compares two ways to check if a property exists in an object: `in` operator and `hasOwnProperty()` method.

**Options compared:**

1. **`in` operator**: This is a built-in operator in JavaScript that checks if a property (or key) exists in an object.
2. **`hasOwnProperty()` method**: This method is part of the Object prototype in JavaScript and returns a boolean value indicating whether the object has the specified property.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **`in` operator**:
	* Pros:
		+ More concise and readable.
		+ Works for all objects, including primitive values (e.g., strings, numbers).
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower due to its implicit coercion behavior (it checks if the property is present in the object's prototype chain as well).
2. **`hasOwnProperty()` method**:
	* Pros:
		+ More explicit and controlled.
		+ Returns a boolean value directly, without relying on implicit coercions.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires more code and can be less readable.

**Other considerations:**

1. **Prototype chain**: The `in` operator checks if the property exists in the object's prototype chain, which includes all the parent objects of the original object. This is not what you want when testing if a property exists only on the original object.
2. **Null and undefined values**: Both methods return false for null and undefined values.

**Test case explanations:**

1. The first test case:
```javascript
var obj = { test: 1 };
console.log(obj.hasOwnProperty('toString'));
```
This code creates an object `obj` with a property `test` and checks if the object has a property named `'toString'`. Since `'toString'` is not present in the object, it will return false.

2. The second test case:
```javascript
var obj = { test: 1 };
console.log('toString' in obj);
```
This code creates an object `obj` with a property `test` and checks if the string `'toString'` is present as a property of the object using the `in` operator. Since `'toString'` is not present, it will return false.

**Library usage:**

None of the test cases use any external libraries.

**Special JavaScript features or syntax:**

None mentioned in the provided benchmark.

As for alternatives, some other ways to check if a property exists in an object include:

1. Using `Object.keys()` and checking if the key is present:
```javascript
var obj = { test: 1 };
if (Object.keys(obj).includes('toString')) {
  console.log(true);
} else {
  console.log(false);
}
```
2. Using a loop to check each property:
```javascript
var obj = { test: 1 };
for (var prop in obj) {
  if (prop === 'toString') {
    console.log(true);
    break;
  }
}
if (!Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(obj, 'toString')) {
  console.log(false);
}
```
However, these approaches are generally less readable and efficient than using the `in` operator or the `hasOwnProperty()` method.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/54.0.2840.99 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 54 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
hasOwnProperty	100450.9 Ops/sec
in	103275.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

comparing in and hasownproperty (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: hasOwnProperty vs in

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

hasOwnProperty

in

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):