Benchmark: Comparison benchmark <= vs < vs ==

Tests:

==
var n = 10000; while(true) { n--; if(n==0) break; }
<=
var n = 10000; while(true) { n--; if(n<=0) break; }
<
var n = 10000; while(true) { n--; if(n<1) break; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
==
<=
<

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data to understand what is being tested in the JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark is defined as a comparison of three different ways to check for zero: `===`, `<=`, and `<`. The goal is to determine which method is faster.

**Options Compared**

1. **`===`**: This is a strict equality operator that checks if the value on both sides of the operator are equal, including their data type. In this case, it's used to check for zero.
2. **`<=`**: This is a less than or equal to operator. It will return true if the value on the left side is less than or equal to the value on the right side.
3. ** `<`**: This is a strict less than operator. It will return true if the value on the left side is strictly less than the value on the right side.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **`===`**:
	* Pros: Provides precise control over data type comparison, which can be important in certain situations.
	* Cons: May be slower due to its strictness and the need for explicit data type checking.
2. **`<=`**:
	* Pros: Returns true if the value on the left side is less than or equal to the value on the right side, which covers more cases.
	* Cons: May not provide precise control over data type comparison, and may be slower due to the additional complexity of handling different data types.
3. ** `<`**:
	* Pros: Faster execution time compared to `===` and `<=`, as it only needs to compare values without considering data types.
	* Cons: Does not account for zero values, so if the value on the left side is exactly zero, this operator will return false.

**Library Used**
None of the benchmarks appear to use any external libraries. The JavaScript code is self-contained and doesn't rely on any third-party libraries or frameworks.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**
None are mentioned in the provided data. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript features like `let`, `const`, and arrow functions may not be supported by all browsers or versions of Chrome used for benchmarking. If these features were present in the benchmark code, their impact on performance would need to be considered.

**Other Alternatives**

1. **`>=`**: This is a greater than or equal to operator that could also be included in the comparison.
2. **`>`**: This is a strict greater than operator that could be used for comparison as well.
3. **`==` and `!=`**: These are loose equality operators that compare values without considering data types, similar to `<=` and `<`, but with different return values.

The benchmark results provide execution times for each of the three operators in the provided test cases. The Chrome 101 browser on a Windows desktop performed best with an average execution time of around 265 seconds per second for the `===` operator, followed closely by `<=`, and then `<`.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/101.0.4951.67 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 101 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
==	265137.4 Ops/sec
<=	264280.5 Ops/sec
<	263644.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Comparison benchmark <= vs < vs == (version: 0)

which is faster to check for zero

Comparing performance of: == vs <= vs <

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

==

<=

<

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):