Benchmark: JS if/if vs if multiple conditions fixed

Script Preparation code:

var test = 'test'

Tests:

if/if
if (test === 'test1' || test === 'test2' || test === 'test3' || test === 'test4' || test === 'test5') { return true; }
if/else if
if (test === 'test1') { return true; } else if (test === 'test2') { return true; } else if (test === 'test3') { return true; } else if (test === 'test4') { return true; } else if (test === 'test5') { return true; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
if/if
if/else if

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help explain what's being tested in this benchmark and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares two approaches to conditional statements in JavaScript: using multiple `if` statements with logical OR (`||`) operators versus an open-ended `if`/`else if` chain. The test uses a simple variable `test` that can take on five different values, and the goal is to determine which approach is faster.

**Test Case 1: Multiple IF Statements**

```javascript
if (test === 'test1' || test === 'test2' || test === 'test3' || test === 'test4' || test === 'test5') {
  return true;
}
```

In this test case, the code checks if `test` matches any of the five values using a series of connected `if` statements with logical OR operators. Each `if` statement is evaluated independently, and if any of them match, the function returns `true`.

Pros:

* Simple to read and understand
* Easy to maintain

Cons:

* Can be slower due to the overhead of evaluating multiple conditions
* May not be as efficient for large numbers of conditions or complex logic

**Test Case 2: Open-Ended IF/ELSE IF**

```javascript
if (test === 'test1') {
  return true;
} else if (test === 'test2') {
  return true;
} else if (test === 'test3') {
  return true;
} else if (test === 'test4') {
  return true;
} else if (test === 'test5') {
  return true;
}
```

In this test case, the code uses a single `if` statement with multiple `else if` clauses to achieve the same result as the previous example. This approach is often referred to as an "open-ended" or "nested" `if` chain.

Pros:

* Can be faster due to reduced overhead and improved branch prediction
* More concise than using multiple `if` statements

Cons:

* May be more difficult to read and understand for complex logic
* Requires careful consideration of the ordering of conditions to avoid false positives

**Library: None**

There are no libraries used in this benchmark.

**Special JavaScript Feature or Syntax: None**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches that could be considered for this benchmark include:

* Using a `switch` statement instead of `if`/`else if`
* Utilizing regular expressions to match multiple patterns
* Employing a more efficient algorithm, such as using a trie data structure to store the conditions

However, these alternatives are not currently being tested in the provided benchmark.

Overall, this benchmark provides a simple and effective way to compare the performance of two common approaches to conditional statements in JavaScript.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Android 13; Mobile; rv:109.0) Gecko/117.0 Firefox/117.0

Browser/OS: Firefox Mobile 117 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
if/if	365692352.0 Ops/sec
if/else if	63615312.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JS if/if vs if multiple conditions fixed (version: 0)

Benchmark of the speed difference between using multiple IF statements and an open-ended IF/ELSE IF.

Comparing performance of: if/if vs if/else if

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

if/if

if/else if

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):