Benchmark: typeof vs types - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

lambda check
const checkType = (value) => typeof value === 'string' || typeof value === 'boolean' || typeof value === 'number' return checkType(49);
checking a object in memory
const types = { 'string': true, 'boolean': true, 'number': true } const checkType = (value) => types[typeof value] return checkType(49);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lambda check
checking a object in memory

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:97.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/97.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 97 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lambda check	750831104.0 Ops/sec
checking a object in memory	22595122.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and some considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark is named "typeof vs types". The purpose of this benchmark is to compare two approaches to check if a value is of certain type in JavaScript. There are only two test cases:

1. **Lambda check**: This approach uses an anonymous function (lambda) to check the type of a value. It's a concise way to define a small, one-time-use function.
2. **Checking a object in memory**: This approach uses an object to store the types and then looks up the corresponding value for a given type.

**Options Comparison**

* **Lambda check vs Checking a object in memory**: These two approaches have different pros and cons:
	+ Pros of Lambda check:
		- Concise code: It's a small, one-time-use function.
		- Easy to read and understand.
	+ Cons of Lambda check:
		- Can be less efficient since it creates a new function object on every execution.
		- Limited flexibility (hardcoded type checking).
	+ Pros of Checking a object in memory:
		- More flexible, as you can easily add or remove types from the object.
		- Can be more efficient since you're only creating a reference to an existing object.
	+ Cons of Checking a object in memory:
		- More verbose code: You need to define and store the type objects.
		- May have overhead due to object lookup.

**Library and Special Features**

There is no specific library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, if we were to add one, it could be a utility function for creating and manipulating type objects (e.g., `typeObjects`).

As for special JavaScript features or syntax, there isn't any mentioned explicitly. The test cases only use basic JavaScript language features.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to check the type of a value in JavaScript include:

* Using the `instanceof` operator directly on an object (e.g., `value instanceof String`)
* Using the `constructor` property on an object (e.g., `value.constructor.name === 'String'`)
* Creating a custom function with multiple `switch` or `case` statements to handle different types
* Using a library like Lodash's `typeCheck` function

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have their own trade-offs and pros/cons compared to the lambda check and object-based approach.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided `Script Preparation Code` is empty, which means the script is likely expected to be run directly. If you were to write a custom benchmark preparation code, it would depend on your specific requirements and test setup.

For example, if you wanted to create a type object for the lambda check approach:

```javascript
const types = {
  'string': true,
  'boolean': true,
  'number': true
};
```

Similarly, if you wanted to use a library like Lodash's `typeCheck` function for the checking a object in memory approach:

```javascript
import { typeCheck } from 'lodash';

const checkType = (value) => typeCheck(value);
```

These are just examples and may not be relevant to your specific benchmarking needs.

Related benchmarks:

typeof vs types (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lambda check vs checking a object in memory

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lambda check

checking a object in memory

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):