Benchmark: Comparing null vs undefined

Script Preparation code:

var x;

Tests:

null strict
var y = (x === null);
undefined strict
var y = (x === undefined);
null loose
var y = (x == null);
undefined loose
var y = (x === undefined);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
null strict
undefined strict
null loose
undefined loose

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing the behavior of JavaScript when comparing `null` and `undefined` values using different approaches: strict equality (`===`) and loose equality (`==`). The benchmark consists of two variables, `x` and `y`, where the value of `x` is initially set to `null` or `undefined`.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is a simple statement that declares a variable `x` without assigning it a value: `"var x;"`. This allows the test to compare the behavior when `x` is explicitly set to `null` or `undefined`, versus when its value is implicitly determined.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which suggests that this benchmark focuses solely on JavaScript execution performance and doesn't rely on any specific HTML elements or layout.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case defines a different comparison scenario:

1. **Null Strict**: `var y = (x === null);` This tests the strict equality operator (`===`) when comparing `x` to `null`.
2. **Undefined Strict**: `var y = (x === undefined);` This tests the strict equality operator (`===`) when comparing `x` to `undefined`.
3. **Null Loose**: `var y = (x == null);` This tests the loose equality operator (`==`) when comparing `x` to `null`. Note that the `==` operator performs type coercion, so it may evaluate `x` as a boolean value.
4. **Undefined Loose**: `var y = (x === undefined);` This tests the loose equality operator (`===`) when comparing `x` to `undefined`.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of each approach:

* **Strict Equality (`===`)**
	+ Pros: Provides a clear, unambiguous result.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to additional checks (e.g., type coercion).
* **Loose Equality (`==`, `!=` , etc.)**
	+ Pros: Faster execution due to fewer checks.
	+ Cons: Can produce incorrect results if the operands are of different types.

In this benchmark, using strict equality operators (`===`) ensures that the test yields accurate results, but may come at a slight performance cost. The loose equality operator (`==`) might provide faster execution, but it's essential to ensure the correct behavior in production code.

**Libraries and Special JS Features**

There are no external libraries mentioned in this benchmark definition. However, note that some JavaScript engines (e.g., Firefox) have introduced additional features or flags that may affect the test results. In particular:

* **Firefox 94**: The benchmark uses a specific version of Firefox, which might be configured with certain performance-related settings or extensions.
* **ES2015+ strict modes**: Some browsers (including Firefox 94) have enabled strict mode by default for ES2015 and later syntax.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to measure JavaScript execution performance include:

1. **Benchmarking frameworks**: Tools like Benchmark.js, jsperf, or Microbenchmark.js provide more structured benchmarking capabilities.
2. **Test runners**: Frameworks like Jest, Mocha, or Cypress can be used for test-driven development (TDD) and automated testing.
3. **Performance profiling tools**: Built-in browser devtools (e.g., Chrome DevTools) or third-party libraries (e.g., PerfHUD) offer detailed performance analysis.

When working with JavaScript benchmarks like this one, consider the following best practices:

1. Use a consistent testing environment to reproduce results.
2. Choose a suitable benchmarking framework or tool for your needs.
3. Ensure accurate and representative test cases.
4. Analyze and understand the execution performance characteristics of each test case.
5. Consider factors like cache effects, loop unrolling, or other optimizations that might impact benchmark results.

Feel free to ask if you have any further questions!

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:94.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/94.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 94 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
null strict	849266240.0 Ops/sec
undefined strict	808797120.0 Ops/sec
null loose	803177344.0 Ops/sec
undefined loose	780756928.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Comparing null vs undefined (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: null strict vs undefined strict vs null loose vs undefined loose

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

null strict

undefined strict

null loose

undefined loose

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):