Benchmark: Boolean vs String comparison for discriminated unions, Obj

Script Preparation code:

function getRandoBoolean() {
  return !!(Math.floor(Math.random() * 2));
}

function getRandoString() {
  return !!(Math.floor(Math.random() * 2)) ? 'accepted' : 'rejected';
}

function getRandoShortString() {
  return !!(Math.floor(Math.random() * 2)) ? 'y' : '';
}


var arrB = [...(new Array(1000))].map(v => getRandoBoolean());
var arrStr = [...(new Array(1000))].map(v => getRandoString());
var arrShortStr = [...(new Array(1000))].map(v => getRandoShortString());

var arrObjB = [...(new Array(1000))].map(v => getRandoBoolean() ? {ok : true ,b: 'value'}: {ok : false ,c: 'value'});
var arrObjStr = [...(new Array(1000))].map(v => getRandoBoolean() ? {ok : 'yes' ,b: 'value'}: {ok : 'no' ,c: 'value'});
var arrObjProp = [...(new Array(1000))].map(v => getRandoBoolean() ? {ok : true ,b: 'value'}: { c: 'value'});

Tests:

rObjB
const rObjB = arrObjB.reduce((acc, v) => v.ok ? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no', '');
rObjBStrict
const rObjBStrict = arrObjB.reduce((acc, v) => v.ok === true ? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no', '');
rObjStr
const rObjStr = arrObjStr.reduce((acc, v) => v.ok === 'yes' ? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no', '');
rObjProp
const rObjProp = arrObjProp.reduce((acc, v) => v.ok ? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no', '');
rObjPropIn
const rObjPropIn = arrObjProp.reduce((acc, v) => 'ok' in v? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no', '');
rObjPropOpt
const rObjPropOpt = arrObjProp.reduce((acc, v) => v?.ok ? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no', '');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
rObjB
rObjBStrict
rObjStr
rObjProp
rObjPropIn
rObjPropOpt

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares four different ways to concatenate strings in JavaScript:

1. Using `reduce()` with implicit coercion (e.g., `v.ok  ? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no'`)
2. Using `reduce()` with explicit coercion (`===` operator) (e.g., `v.ok === true ? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no'`)
3. Using the optional chaining operator (`?.`) (e.g., `v?.ok ? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no'`)
4. Checking if a property exists using the `in` operator (e.g., `'ok' in v? acc + 'yes' : acc + 'no'`)

**Comparison**

The benchmark tests these four approaches on two types of data:

1. Boolean values (`arrB`) and
2. Objects with boolean properties (`arrObjB`, `arrObjStr`, and `arrObjProp`).

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Implicit Coercion (using `reduce()` with implicit coercion)**:
	* Pros: Simple, concise, and easy to read.
	* Cons: Can lead to unexpected behavior if the values being concatenated are not numbers or strings.
2. **Explicit Coercion (`===` operator)**:
	* Pros: Ensures explicit type checking and avoids potential pitfalls of implicit coercion.
	* Cons: More verbose and less concise than the implicit approach.
3. **Optional Chaining Operator (`?.`)**:
	* Pros: Modern, expressive, and safe (only attempts to access properties if they exist).
	* Cons: Requires support for the optional chaining operator in older browsers or environments.
4. **In-Operator (`in` operator)**:
	* Pros: Simple, concise, and widely supported (works in most JavaScript engines).
	* Cons: May not be as expressive or modern as other approaches.

**Library Usage**

None of the provided benchmarks use any external libraries. The `reduce()` function is a built-in JavaScript method.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The benchmark uses the optional chaining operator (`?.`) and the in-operator (`in`), which are relatively modern features introduced in ECMAScript 2020 (ES2020).

Now, regarding alternative approaches:

Other alternatives to consider when concatenating strings in JavaScript include:

1. Using a loop instead of `reduce()`.
2. Using template literals.
3. Using `+` operator with string concatenation.

However, these alternatives may not offer significant performance benefits over the approaches tested in this benchmark.

If you're interested in exploring further optimizations or alternative approaches, I can provide more information on those topics!

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/91.0.4472.124 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 91 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
rObjB	141390.3 Ops/sec
rObjBStrict	157246.0 Ops/sec
rObjStr	150660.5 Ops/sec
rObjProp	93523.2 Ops/sec
rObjPropIn	150031.2 Ops/sec
rObjPropOpt	127653.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Boolean vs String comparison for discriminated unions, Obj (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: rObjB vs rObjBStrict vs rObjStr vs rObjProp vs rObjPropIn vs rObjPropOpt

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

rObjB

rObjBStrict

rObjStr

rObjProp

rObjPropIn

rObjPropOpt

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):