Benchmark: isEmpty vs length

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

// empty array
window.foo1 = [];

// array of strings
window.foo2 = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd', 'e'];

// array of objects
window.foo3 = [{ a: 1, b: 2, c: { a: 1, b: 2, c: { a: 1, b: 2 } } }, { a: 1, b: 2, c: { a: 1, b: 2, c: { a: 1, b: 2 } } }, { a: 1, b: 2, c: { a: 1, b: 2, c: { a: 1, b: 2 } } }];

Tests:

isEmpty array of strings
_.isEmpty(window.foo2);
length array of strings
window.foo2.length === 0;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
isEmpty array of strings
length array of strings

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.

Let's break down the provided JSON and benchmark preparation code to understand what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark defines two test cases:

1. `_.isEmpty(window.foo2);`: This test case checks if an array of strings (`window.foo2`) is empty using the `_.isEmpty()` function from Lodash, a popular JavaScript utility library.
2. `window.foo2.length === 0;`: This test case checks if the length of the same array (`window.foo2`) is equal to 0.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. Using `_.isEmpty(window.foo2);` (Lodash's `isEmpty()` function)
2. Using a simple `length === 0` check (without using any library)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Using `_.isEmpty(window.foo2);`**:
	* Pros:
		+ Easy to read and understand, as it uses a well-known function from Lodash.
		+ Efficient, as Lodash has optimized this implementation for performance.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires the presence of the Lodash library in the browser or environment, which might not be the case for all users.
2. **Using `window.foo2.length === 0;`**:
	* Pros:
		+ Does not require any external libraries.
		+ Simple and easy to understand.
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower due to the need to access and compare each element in the array, which can lead to a linear time complexity (O(n)).
		+ Less efficient than using `_.isEmpty()`.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like string manipulation, array and object manipulation, and more. The `_.isEmpty()` function is part of Lodash's "array" module, which provides methods for working with arrays.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided benchmark definition.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to implement a custom implementation without using any external libraries, you could use a simple loop to check if the length of `window.foo2` is 0:

```javascript
var result = window.foo2.length === 0;
```

However, this approach would likely be slower and less efficient than using Lodash's optimized implementation.

To make the benchmark more inclusive, you might consider adding additional test cases that cover other scenarios, such as:

* Checking if an empty object is empty (`_.isEmpty({})`)
* Using a custom implementation for `length === 0` check
* Adding more complex array data structures (e.g., nested arrays, objects with arrays)

Keep in mind that the choice of benchmarking approach and test cases ultimately depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

isEmpty vs length (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: isEmpty array of strings vs length array of strings

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

isEmpty array of strings

length array of strings

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):