Benchmark: Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster with string comparison?

Tests:

test equality
var n = 0; while(true) { n++; if(`${n}`==`100000`) break; }
test strict equality
var n = 0; while(true) { n++; if(`${n}`===`100000`) break; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test equality
test strict equality

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/111.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 111 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
test equality	302.2 Ops/sec
test strict equality	306.3 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 benchmark test cases and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**What is tested?**

The benchmark tests two different ways of comparing values in JavaScript: using the loose equality operator (`==`) and the strict equality operator (`===`). The tests aim to determine if there is a performance benefit to replacing `==` with `===`.

**Options compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Loose Equality Operator (`==`)**: This operator performs type coercion, meaning it attempts to convert both operands to a common type before comparing them. This can lead to unexpected results due to type conversions.
2. **Strict Equality Operator (`===`)**: This operator checks if both values are of the same data type and have the same value.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Loose Equality Operator (`==`)**
	+ Pros:
		- May be faster in some cases, since it avoids type coercion.
		- Can be more intuitive for simple comparisons.
	+ Cons:
		- Can lead to unexpected results due to type conversions.
		- May not be suitable for all use cases, especially when dealing with data of different types.
* **Strict Equality Operator (`===`)**
	+ Pros:
		- Provides predictable and reliable results, as it checks both value and type.
		- Suitable for most use cases, including comparisons involving data of different types.
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower than `==` in some cases due to the additional check.

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's worth noting that the `${n}` syntax used in the benchmark definitions suggests that the tests are using a template engine or string interpolation feature specific to JavaScript.

**Special JS features or syntax**

The `==` and `===` operators themselves are built-in JavaScript operators, which means they don't require any additional libraries or setup. However, the use of template literals (e.g., `${n}`) is a relatively recent feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to equality checks, you might consider using:

1. **Type guards**: Functions that check the type of a value and return a boolean indicating whether it matches a certain condition.
2. **Pattern matching**: A feature introduced in ECMAScript 2020 (ES12) that allows for more expressive and concise comparisons.
3. **Third-party libraries or frameworks**: Some libraries, like Lodash or Ramda, provide additional functionality for equality checks and other utility functions.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be directly applicable to this specific benchmark test case, but they can provide a starting point for exploring alternative approaches to equality checks in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster with string comparison? (version: 0)

Is there a performance benefit to replacing == with ===?

Comparing performance of: test equality vs test strict equality

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

test equality

test strict equality

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):