Benchmark: array.length vs array.length > 0

Script Preparation code:

var arr = [];

Tests:

array length
if (arr.length) { console.log(1); } else { console.log(0); }
array length > 0
if (arr.length > 0) { console.log(1); } else { console.log(0); }

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 119 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 112 runs

array length

378K/s

array length > 0

373K/s

View exact numbers

✓ array length : 377,628 ops/sec
• array length > 0 : 373,123 ops/sec

Firefox 7 runs

array length > 0

184K/s

array length

180K/s

View exact numbers

✓ array length > 0 : 184,318 ops/sec
• array length : 180,497 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array length
array length > 0

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/138.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 138 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

array length

226K/s

array length > 0

221K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ array length	226,387 Ops/sec
array length > 0	220,578 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined by a JSON object that contains the following information:

* `Name`: A unique name for the benchmark.
* `Description`: An empty description, which implies that this benchmark doesn't have a specific purpose or context.
* `Script Preparation Code`: A JavaScript code snippet that initializes an empty array (`var arr = [];`).
* `Html Preparation Code`: An empty HTML code snippet, indicating that no additional setup is required for the test.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two individual test cases:

1. `array length`
	* The test case checks if the length of the `arr` array is truthy (i.e., not zero).
	* The script definition uses a simple conditional statement: `if (arr.length) { console.log(1); } else { console.log(0); }`.
2. `array length > 0`
	* The test case checks if the length of the `arr` array is greater than 0.
	* The script definition uses another simple conditional statement: `if (arr.length > 0) { console.log(1); } else { console.log(0); }`.

**Comparison**

The two test cases compare the performance of checking the length of an array using two different conditions:

* `array length`: Checks if the length is truthy, which will be false for an empty array.
* `array length > 0`: Checks if the length is greater than 0, which will only be true for non-empty arrays.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Simplicity**: Using a simple conditional statement like `if (arr.length)` can be straightforward to understand and implement.
	* Pros: Easy to read and maintain.
	* Cons: May not be optimized for performance, as it checks the length even if it's zero.
2. **Efficiency**: Checking `arr.length > 0` directly may be more efficient than checking `if (arr.length)` because it only increments the counter when the array is non-empty.
	* Pros: Can potentially lead to better performance.
	* Cons: May be less intuitive for developers who are not familiar with this syntax.

**Library or Framework**

There doesn't appear to be any external library or framework being used in these test cases. The JavaScript code snippets are simple and don't rely on any additional dependencies.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The test cases don't use any special JavaScript features or syntax, such as async/await, Promises, or modern language features like arrow functions or template literals.

**Alternatives**

If you wanted to benchmark the performance of different approaches to check array length, some alternatives could include:

1. Using `Object.keys(arr).length` instead of `arr.length`, which is a more concise way to get the length of an array.
2. Comparing the performance of using `arr.length > 0` versus `arr.length === 0`.
3. Benchmarking different caching strategies for arrays, such as storing the initial length in a variable and reusing it or recalculating it on each access.

These alternatives might require modifications to the benchmark script and HTML preparation code but could provide more comprehensive insights into array length performance optimization.

array.length vs array.length > 0 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `array length vs array length > 0`

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

array length

array length > 0

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 119 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 112 runs

Firefox 7 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

array.length vs array.length > 0 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: array length vs array length > 0

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

array length

array length > 0

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 119 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 112 runs

Firefox 7 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `array length vs array length > 0`