Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
(instanceof Function) vs (typeof function)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
instanceof vs typeof
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
function fun(x) { return x * 2; }
Tests:
instanceof
fun instanceof Function
typeof
typeof fun === 'function'
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
instanceof
typeof
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:140.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/140.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 140 on Linux
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=611782" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
typeof
1504.3M/s
instanceof
86.3M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
typeof
1,504,292,224 Ops/sec
instanceof
86,303,824 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition JSON represents a simple JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches: 1. `(instanceof Function)`: This checks if an object is an instance of the `Function` constructor. 2. `(typeof function)`: This checks if the result of applying the `typeof` operator to a function is `'function'`. **Comparison** The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches in two test cases: 1. `fun instanceof Function` 2. `typeof fun === 'function'` In other words, the benchmark is measuring how fast it can execute each comparison. **Pros and Cons** 1. `(instanceof Function)`: * Pros: + More precise and robust, as it checks if the object is an instance of the `Function` constructor. * Cons: + May have a higher overhead due to the need to create a proxy or wrapper function to simulate the `Function` constructor. 2. `(typeof function)`: * Pros: + Faster and more efficient, as it only needs to apply the `typeof` operator to the function. * Cons: + May return incorrect results for certain edge cases (e.g., if the function is defined using a different syntax). **Library Used** In this benchmark, there is no explicitly mentioned library. However, the use of `(instanceof Function)` suggests that the test may be using some form of object creation or simulation to mimic the behavior of a function. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The test cases only rely on basic JavaScript operators and constructs. **Other Alternatives** If you were to rewrite this benchmark, you might consider alternative approaches, such as: 1. Using `instanceof` with a more specific constructor (e.g., `new Function()`) to reduce overhead. 2. Creating a custom function or proxy to simulate the behavior of `(typeof function)`. 3. Using a different comparison operator (e.g., `===`) that may be faster or more efficient. Keep in mind that the best approach will depend on the specific requirements and constraints of your use case. As for the benchmark preparation code: ```javascript function fun(x) { return x * 2; } ``` This code defines a simple function that takes a single argument `x` and returns its double value. The purpose of this function is to serve as a test subject for the comparison operators being tested.
Related benchmarks
Function: typeof vs instanceof
typeof vs instanceof Function
typeof vs instanceof Function vs call
instanceof vs typeof function
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?