Benchmark: Typeof vs raw accessor 3

Script Preparation code:

var data = { 
  get: function() { 
    if (Math.random() < 0.000000001) { 
      console.log(5); 
    } 
  } 
};
var fn = function() {  
  if (Math.random() < 0.000000001) { 
    console.log(5); 
  } 
}

Tests:

typeof function
var d1 = Math.random() > 0.5 ? data : fn; var d2 = d1 === data ? fn : data; typeof d1 === 'function' ? d1() : d1.get(); typeof d2 === 'function' ? d2() : d2.get();
typeof object
var d1 = Math.random() > 0.5 ? data : fn; var d2 = d1 === data ? fn : data; typeof d1 === 'object' ? d1.get() : d1(); typeof d2 === 'object' ? d2.get() : d2();
raw
data.get(); fn();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
typeof function
typeof object
raw

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript benchmark test case, specifically designed to compare the performance of different approaches for determining the type of an object or value in JavaScript.

**Overview**

The benchmark test case consists of three individual test cases:

1. `typeof function`
2. `typeof object`
3. `raw`

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines two variables: `data` and `fn`. `data` is an object with a `get()` method, while `fn` is a simple anonymous function that returns `undefined`. The `script` preparation code also includes a randomization factor to introduce variability in the benchmark results.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which suggests that the benchmark is designed to be run as a server-side test case or a test written in Node.js.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case uses the `typeof` operator to determine the type of an object or value. The syntax and semantics of these operators are as follows:

1. **`typeof function`**
	* This test case uses the `typeof` operator with the unary `function` keyword, which returns a string indicating that the input is a function.
	* In modern JavaScript engines, this approach is generally considered to be more efficient than using the `instanceof` operator or accessing the `prototype` chain, since it allows for direct type checking without the overhead of dynamic property lookup.
	* However, older browsers may not support this syntax correctly, which could lead to inconsistent results.
2. **`typeof object`**
	* This test case uses the `typeof` operator with the unary `object` keyword, which returns a string indicating that the input is an object.
	* Similar to the previous test case, this approach is generally considered efficient in modern JavaScript engines.
3. **`raw`**
	* This test case simply calls both `data.get()` and `fn()`, without using any type checking or coercion.
	* This test case serves as a baseline or "raw" benchmark, providing a simple measure of the execution time of these two functions.

**Library Use**

There is no explicit library use in this benchmark test case. However, some JavaScript engines may use internal libraries to optimize the `typeof` operator or other operations.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

This benchmark does not explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax, but it relies on modern JavaScript engine optimizations and quirks that may not be supported by older browsers or versions of JavaScript engines.

**Alternatives**

For those interested in exploring alternative approaches to this benchmark, some options include:

* Using the `instanceof` operator instead of `typeof`.
* Accessing the `prototype` chain using the `in` operator.
* Using a library like `fast-typeof` or `type-of` to implement type checking for JavaScript engines that don't support modern syntax.
* Implementing custom type checking logic in a language-specific way, such as by parsing the input expression and analyzing its structure.

Related benchmarks:

Typeof vs raw accessor 3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: typeof function vs typeof object vs raw

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

typeof function

typeof object

raw

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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