Benchmark: boolean casting - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

Pure boolean
true === true
Boolean cacting
Boolean(1) === Boolean(1)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Pure boolean
Boolean cacting

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_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/98.0.4758.109 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 98 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Pure boolean	2076626816.0 Ops/sec
Boolean cacting	7451468.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore the JavaScript microbenchmark you provided.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition JSON contains the following information:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark, which is "boolean casting".
* `Description`: An empty string, indicating that no description was provided.
* `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`: Empty strings, suggesting that no specific code needs to be executed before running the benchmarks.

**Individual Test Cases**

The test cases are stored in an array of objects. Each object contains:

* `Benchmark Definition`: A JavaScript statement that represents a benchmark, which is either "true === true" or "Boolean(1) === Boolean(1)".
* `Test Name`: A descriptive name for each test case.

Let's analyze the two test cases:

1. **Pure boolean**: This benchmark tests the equality of two identical boolean values (true). In JavaScript, this comparison is trivial and should be equivalent across different browsers and environments.
2. **Boolean casting**: This benchmark tests the behavior of the `Boolean()` function when converting a number to a boolean value (e.g., `Boolean(1)`). The expected result is that it returns true.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare the following options:

* Trivial equality check using `===` (test case 1)
* Conversion of a number to a boolean value using `Boolean()` (test case 2)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Trivial equality check (`===`)**:
	* Pros: Fast and straightforward.
	* Cons: May not cover all edge cases, such as NaN or undefined values.
2. **Boolean casting (`Boolean()`)**:
	* Pros: Covers the conversion of numbers to boolean values, which can be useful in certain scenarios.
	* Cons: Can introduce additional overhead compared to a simple `===` check.

**Library and Purpose**

There is no library explicitly mentioned in the provided JSON. However, the use of `Boolean()` suggests that the benchmark is testing the behavior of this function in different browsers.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None are explicitly mentioned, but it's worth noting that some older JavaScript engines might have quirks when dealing with boolean values or the `Boolean()` function.

**Other Alternatives**

To further test the performance of boolean comparisons, other alternatives could include:

* Testing with NaN (Not a Number) values.
* Using different types of numbers (e.g., integer vs. floating-point).
* Comparing boolean values to non-boolean values using `===` or other comparison operators.

By exploring these additional scenarios, you can gain a deeper understanding of how browsers and JavaScript engines handle various boolean-related operations.

Related benchmarks:

boolean casting (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Pure boolean vs Boolean cacting

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Pure boolean

Boolean cacting

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):