Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Check if array has elements 2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
length vs length > 0
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
length
const list = [1, 2, 3] if (list.length) return
length > 0
const list = [1, 2, 3] if (list.length > 0) return
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
length
length > 0
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 dive into explaining the test cases on MeasureThat.net. The provided JSON represents a set of microbenchmarks, where users can create and run JavaScript tests to measure their performance. In this case, we have two individual test cases: **Benchmark Definition json** The benchmark definition is a simple JavaScript code snippet that defines an array `list` with three elements: `[1, 2, 3]`. The purpose of this benchmark is to check if the array has at least one element. ```javascript const list = [1, 2, 3] if (list.length) return ``` In this case, there are two possible test cases: **Individual test cases** 1. `length`: This test case checks if the condition `list.length` evaluates to a truthy value (i.e., the array has at least one element). The test code is identical to the benchmark definition. 2. `length > 0`: This test case checks if the condition `list.length > 0` evaluates to a truthy value (i.e., the array has at least one non-zero element). **Options compared** The two test cases compare the performance of checking if an array has at least one element using different conditions: * `length`: This condition simply checks if the length property of the array is greater than 0. However, in JavaScript, arrays are always treated as objects with a length property that represents the number of elements. * `length > 0`: This condition checks if the length property of the array is strictly greater than 0. **Pros and Cons** 1. **`length`**: Pros: * Simple to implement * Fast, since it only requires accessing the `length` property of the array. Cons: * May produce false positives (i.e., arrays with zero length but non-zero elements). 2. **`length > 0`**: Pros: * Less likely to produce false positives (since it checks for a strict greater-than value) Cons: * Slightly slower, since it requires additional arithmetic operations. **Library and purpose** There is no library mentioned in the provided code snippets. The tests only rely on built-in JavaScript features. **Special JS feature or syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these test cases. They simply utilize basic JavaScript concepts like arrays and conditional statements. **Other alternatives** If you were to create similar benchmarks, you might consider additional conditions, such as: * Checking if an array has a specific element (e.g., `list.includes(2)`). * Checking the type of an array's elements (e.g., `Array.isArray(list)`). Keep in mind that the performance impact of these variations may be negligible for small arrays like `[1, 2, 3]`. However, as the size of the array increases, these optimizations might become more important. I hope this explanation helps you understand what's being tested on MeasureThat.net!
Related benchmarks:
Fastest way to check if array have an element returning true or false (2)
> or !===
check if arrya
array indexOf (gt -1) vs includes vs some
Array.includes() vs Set.has() for small array
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?