Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
typeof
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
typeof vs access
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var question = { search: "toto" };
Tests:
typeof
typeof question.search
access
question.search
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
typeof
access
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down what's being tested in the provided JSON. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is a simple JavaScript expression: `typeof question.search`. This expression tests the behavior of the `typeof` operator when applied to a property value on an object (`question.search`). In essence, the benchmark is checking how quickly different browsers can evaluate this expression. The result will show which browser executes the `typeof` check faster. **Options Compared** Two options are compared in this benchmark: 1. **`typeof` operator**: This is a built-in JavaScript operator that returns a string indicating the type of its operand. 2. **Direct property access (`question.search`)**: This option accesses the `search` property directly on the `question` object. **Pros and Cons** * Using the `typeof` operator has pros: + It's a well-established, widely supported method for checking the type of an expression. + It may provide accurate results even if the property value is null or undefined (though this might not be what the benchmark author intends). * Using direct property access (`question.search`) has cons: + If the `search` property doesn't exist on the object, it will throw a TypeError. However, in some cases, accessing the property and then checking its type with `typeof` can be faster. + If the `search` property is very large or complex, accessing it directly might take longer. **Library** In this benchmark, there is no explicit library being used (i.e., no external dependencies). However, JavaScript engines like V8 in Chrome execute and optimize the code in various ways, which might be influenced by internal libraries or optimizations. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There doesn't appear to be any special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested here. The benchmark is focused on a simple property access and `typeof` operator combination. **Other Alternatives** Other approaches could include: * Using a different type-checking function, like `isType()` from the Lodash library. * Implementing a custom type-checking mechanism using switch statements or other control flow constructs. * Testing more complex expressions involving multiple properties or operators. * Using alternative property access methods, such as bracket notation (`question['search']`) or the optional chaining operator (`?.`). Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark code and might not be relevant for this specific test case.
Related benchmarks:
typeof undefined
Lodash isPlainObject vs typeof
Testing123
typeof vs boolean
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?