Benchmark: null tests - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

is
var x = null; x === null;
===
var x = null; Object.is(x, null);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
is
===

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its various aspects.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a simple JavaScript microbenchmarking test case, which measures the performance of two different approaches for checking if a variable is equal to null. There are no specific libraries or special features mentioned in the JSON.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, two options are compared:

1. **"is"`**: This option uses the `===` operator (strict equality) and checks if the variable `x` is strictly equal to null.
2. **"=="**: This option uses the `==` operator (loose equality) and checks if the value of `x` is equal to null.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons associated with each approach:

*   **"is"`:
    *   Pros:
        *   Provides more accurate results, as it checks for strict equality.
        *   Less susceptible to type coercion issues.
    *   Cons:
        *   May be slower due to the strict equality check.

*   `"=="`
    *   Pros:
        *   Faster, since it only checks if the value is equal to null.
    *   Cons:
        *   More prone to type coercion issues and false positives.
        *   Less accurate results compared to "is".

**Library and Special Features**

In this benchmark, no specific libraries or special features are mentioned. The tests rely solely on built-in JavaScript functionality.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to compare the performance of different approaches for checking if a variable is not equal to null, you can consider using:

1.  `!==`
2.  `!=`

These operators perform non-strict equality checks and may have varying levels of performance depending on your specific use case.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided JSON includes no script preparation code or HTML preparation code, which means that the tests are likely self-contained and do not require any additional setup.

In summary, this benchmark measures the performance difference between using strict equality (`===`) and loose equality (`==`) for checking if a variable is equal to null. The results indicate that "is" (strict equality) is more accurate but slightly slower than "==".

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/91.0.4472.77 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 91 on Mac OS X 10.14.1

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
is	637402240.0 Ops/sec
===	5087009.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

null tests (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: is vs ===

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

is

===

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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