Benchmark: Extract data from array - map() vs JSON.stringify() vs for loop dfsgfgsdfgsdfg sdfg sdf gsdfg sd

Script Preparation code:

var isVirtual = true;

Tests:

ternary
isVirtual ? 0 : 1;
Number
Number(isVirtual)
block
if (isVirtual) { return 0} else {return 1}

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ternary
Number
block

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is testing three different approaches to determine whether an expression evaluates to `0` or `1`, which seems like a simple task at first, but has some nuances. The test cases are:

1. **Ternary operator**: `isVirtual ? 0 : 1`
2. **Number() function**: `Number(isVirtual)`
3. **Conditional statement**: `if (isVirtual) { return 0} else {return 1}`

**Approach Comparison**

Here's a brief overview of each approach and their pros and cons:

1. **Ternary operator**: This is the most straightforward way to express the condition. It's concise, readable, and performs well in most cases.
	* Pros: Easy to understand, efficient, and compact.
	* Cons: May not work as expected in all edge cases (e.g., when `isVirtual` is null or undefined).
2. **Number() function**: This approach uses a function that converts the result of an expression to a number. It's more explicit than the ternary operator but may incur additional overhead.
	* Pros: Robust, works well with edge cases, and provides a clear indication of the intention behind the code.
	* Cons: May be slower due to the extra function call and conversion step.
3. **Conditional statement**: This is the most verbose way to express the condition, but it's also more explicit and easier to understand.
	* Pros: Clearly conveys the intent behind the code, works well with edge cases, and can be optimized further using early returns or switch statements.
	* Cons: More verbose than the ternary operator, may incur additional overhead due to the extra control flow.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, `isVirtual` is a variable used as an expression. The `Number()` function and conditional statement use this variable to determine its truthiness.

The `Number()` function is part of JavaScript's built-in functions. It converts a value or expression to a number, which can be useful in various scenarios, such as when working with Boolean values or strings that contain numbers.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There doesn't seem to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being used in this benchmark, aside from the `Number()` function and ternary operator. However, it's worth noting that some newer JavaScript features like arrow functions, template literals, or async/await might be used in more complex benchmarks.

**Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches could be:

* Using a switch statement with a single case: `switch (isVirtual) { case true: return 0; default: return 1; }`
* Utilizing a utility function like `Boolean()`: `Boolean(isVirtual)`
* Leveraging a more modern approach like using a boolean flag and early returns: `if (isVirtual) { return true; } else { return false; }`

These alternatives might offer performance improvements or different trade-offs in terms of code readability and maintainability. However, they are not part of the current benchmark and would require additional testing to determine their suitability.

Overall, this benchmark provides a concise and readable way to test the performance of three different approaches to determining whether an expression evaluates to `0` or `1`. By using built-in functions and clear variable names, it's easy to understand what's being tested and why.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/122.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 122 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
ternary	19297342.0 Ops/sec
Number	5200649.5 Ops/sec
block	18188226.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Extract data from array - map() vs JSON.stringify() vs for loop dfsgfgsdfgsdfg sdfg sdf gsdfg sd (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ternary vs Number vs block

Created: 7 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ternary

Number

block

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):