Benchmark: Return true vs empty body

Script Preparation code:

var notDefined;
var defined = 1;

var emptyFunc = function() {};
var trueFunc = function() { return true; }
var undefinedFunc = function() { return undefined; }
var nullFunc = function() { return null; }
var notDefinedFunc = function() { return notDefined; }
var definedFunc = function() { return defined; }
var staticFunc = function() { return 1; }
var localUndefinedFunc = (function() {
  var notDefinedAgain;
  
  return function() {
  	return notDefinedAgain;
  }
})();

Tests:

emptyFunc
emptyFunc();
trueFunc
trueFunc();
undefinedFunc
undefinedFunc();
nullFunc
nullFunc();
notDefinedFunc
notDefinedFunc();
definedFunc
definedFunc();
staticFunc
staticFunc();
localUndefinedFunc
localUndefinedFunc();
wrapped localUndefinedFunc function
(localUndefinedFunc())

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
emptyFunc
trueFunc
undefinedFunc
nullFunc
notDefinedFunc
definedFunc
staticFunc
localUndefinedFunc
wrapped localUndefinedFunc function

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/53.0.2785.116 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 53 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
emptyFunc	9774589.0 Ops/sec
trueFunc	9822739.0 Ops/sec
undefinedFunc	3553377.8 Ops/sec
nullFunc	9695478.0 Ops/sec
notDefinedFunc	5249804.0 Ops/sec
definedFunc	5274334.5 Ops/sec
staticFunc	9485390.0 Ops/sec
localUndefinedFunc	9471848.0 Ops/sec
wrapped localUndefinedFunc function	9802709.0 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 JSON data to understand what is being tested and the different approaches being compared.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Script Preparation Code` section of the benchmark definition contains a series of functions that are defined in JavaScript. These functions are:

* `emptyFunc`: an empty function with no code inside it
* `trueFunc`: a function that returns `true`
* `undefinedFunc`: a function that returns `undefined`
* `nullFunc`: a function that returns `null`
* `notDefinedFunc`: a function that returns `notDefined` (which is likely not defined in the scope)
* `definedFunc`: a function that returns a constant value `1`
* `staticFunc`: a static function that returns a constant value `1`
* `localUndefinedFunc`: an inner function within another function, which returns a local variable `notDefinedAgain`

These functions are used to test different scenarios in JavaScript, such as the behavior of undefined and null values.

**Options being compared**

The options being compared are:

* Calling an empty function (`emptyFunc`)
* Calling a function that returns `true` (`trueFunc`)
* Calling a function that returns `undefined` (`undefinedFunc`)
* Calling a function that returns `null` (`nullFunc`)
* Calling a function that is not defined in the scope (`notDefinedFunc`)
* Calling a static function (`staticFunc`)
* Calling an inner function within another function (`localUndefinedFunc`)

**Pros and Cons**

Each approach has its own pros and cons:

* Calling an empty function: This test checks for any overhead or performance implications of executing an empty function. Pros: simple to execute, minimal impact on performance. Cons: may not accurately represent real-world usage.
* Calling a function that returns `true`: This test checks the behavior of functions that always return a boolean value. Pros: easy to understand and measure. Cons: limited insight into more complex logic.
* Calling a function that returns `undefined`: This test checks the handling of undefined values within functions. Pros: relevant for error handling and null checks. Cons: may not accurately represent all cases where undefined values are present.
* Calling a function that returns `null`: Similar to calling a function that returns `undefined`, but tests null handling specifically.
* Calling a non-defined function (`notDefinedFunc`): This test checks the behavior when trying to call a function that is not defined. Pros: important for error handling and null checks. Cons: may not accurately represent cases where undefined values are present, as they can be handled differently.
* Calling a static function (`staticFunc`): This test checks the performance implications of calling a static function versus an instance method. Pros: relevant for performance comparison. Cons: limited insight into real-world usage scenarios.
* Calling an inner function within another function (`localUndefinedFunc`): This test checks the behavior of nested functions and variables within JavaScript. Pros: useful for understanding scope and variable binding. Cons: may not accurately represent real-world usage.

**Real-world implications**

These tests can be used to:

* Optimize performance-critical code paths
* Improve error handling and null checking in functions
* Understand the behavior of static functions versus instance methods
* Analyze the impact of inner functions within JavaScript

However, it's essential to consider that these tests may not accurately represent real-world usage scenarios. In particular, cases involving more complex logic or asynchronous execution may require additional testing.

**Recommendations**

To get a comprehensive understanding of JavaScript performance and behavior, it's recommended to extend this benchmarking framework to include:

* Tests for more complex functions with nested logic
* Asynchronous function calls (e.g., callbacks, promises)
* Error handling scenarios (e.g., try-catch blocks)
* Edge cases (e.g., very large or very small input values)

By expanding the scope of these tests, developers can gain a deeper understanding of JavaScript's strengths and weaknesses in different areas.

Related benchmarks:

Return true vs empty body (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: emptyFunc vs trueFunc vs undefinedFunc vs nullFunc vs notDefinedFunc vs definedFunc vs staticFunc vs localUndefinedFunc vs wrapped localUndefinedFunc function

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

emptyFunc

trueFunc

undefinedFunc

nullFunc

notDefinedFunc

definedFunc

staticFunc

localUndefinedFunc

wrapped localUndefinedFunc function

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):