Benchmark: if condition speed test 3

Script Preparation code:

const a = 1;
const b = 1;

Tests:

if condition together
const a = 1; const b = 1; if (a || b) { return console.log('hi'); }
if condition 2
const a = 1; const b = 1; if (a) { return console.log('hi'); } if (b) { return console.log('hi'); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
if condition together
if condition 2

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/108.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 108 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
if condition together	264996.6 Ops/sec
if condition 2	280424.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring JavaScript performance is crucial for creating efficient and optimized code. Let's break down what's being tested in the provided JSON.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition specifies two scripts:

1. `const a = 1;\r\nconst b = 1;`: This sets up two variables, `a` and `b`, with values of 1.
2. The `if` condition: There are two variations of the `if` statement:
	* `if (a || b) {\r\n return console.log('hi');\r\n}`: This checks if either `a` or `b` is truthy, and logs "hi" to the console if true.
	* `if (a) {\r\n return console.log('hi');\r\n}\r\n\rnif (b) {\r\n return console.log('hi');\r\n}`: This checks both `a` and `b` separately, and logs "hi" to the console if either is truthy.

**Comparison of Options**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Short-circuit evaluation**: The first option uses short-circuit evaluation, which stops evaluating the expression as soon as it determines that the condition will be false.
2. **Separate checks for `a` and `b`**: The second option checks both `a` and `b` separately before determining the outcome.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Short-circuit evaluation**:
	* Pros:
		+ Can reduce the number of evaluations required, making it faster.
		+ Can help avoid unnecessary computations.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be as readable or intuitive for some developers.
2. **Separate checks for `a` and `b`**:
	* Pros:
		+ More explicit and easier to understand for some developers.
		+ Could potentially lead to better code organization and reusability.
	* Cons:
		+ May require more evaluations, making it slower.

In general, short-circuit evaluation is a common idiom in JavaScript and can be beneficial when performance is critical. However, separate checks for `a` and `b` might be more readable or intuitive for some developers.

**Library**

There doesn't appear to be any specific library used in these benchmark tests. The code is straightforward and uses built-in JavaScript features.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None of the provided test cases use special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard `if` statement.

**Other Considerations**

To optimize these benchmarks, consider the following:

* Use a more efficient data structure for the variables, such as `let` instead of `const`.
* Remove any unnecessary whitespace or characters from the code.
* Test with different browsers and versions to ensure compatibility.
* Run multiple iterations of each benchmark to get an accurate average execution time.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, consider:

* Using a JavaScript performance testing library like Jest, Mocha, or Benchmark.js.
* Experimenting with other optimization techniques, such as caching, memoization, or parallel processing.
* Investigating the impact of different programming languages, frameworks, or libraries on performance.

Related benchmarks:

if condition speed test 3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: if condition together vs if condition 2

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

if condition together

if condition 2

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):