Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
optionally chain me up on valentimes day
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
Comparing performance of:
optionally chaining deez vs if deez
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var obj = {a: {b: {c: {d: 1}}}}
Tests:
optionally chaining deez
let val = obj?.a?.b?.c?.d;
if deez
if( obj && obj.a && obj.a.b && obj.a.b.c && obj.a.b.c.d) { let val = obj.a.b.c.d;}
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
optionally chaining deez
if deez
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
10 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/141.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 141 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=619935" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
if deez
164.2M/s
optionally chaining deez
158.3M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
if deez
164,165,232 Ops/sec
optionally chaining deez
158,304,176 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested in the benchmark. **Benchmark Definition** The first part of the JSON data represents the benchmark itself. In this case, there are two different approaches to test: 1. **Optionally Chaining**: This approach tests how quickly a JavaScript engine can evaluate an expression that uses optional chaining (?.) to access nested properties. The expression `obj?.a?.b?.c?.d` is used as the benchmark definition. 2. **Pre-conditional Check**: This approach tests how quickly a JavaScript engine can execute a conditional statement that checks for the existence of multiple properties before accessing them. The expression `if ( obj && obj.a && obj.a.b && obj.a.b.c && obj.a.b.c.d) { let val = obj.a.b.c.d; }` is used as the benchmark definition. **Options Compared** The two options being compared are: * **Optionally Chaining**: This approach uses optional chaining to access nested properties. It's a concise way to navigate through objects and avoid null pointer exceptions. * **Pre-conditional Check**: This approach uses a conditional statement to check for the existence of multiple properties before accessing them. While it may seem more verbose than optional chaining, it can be useful in certain situations where the order of operations matters. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: **Optionally Chaining** Pros: * More concise and expressive * Can avoid null pointer exceptions Cons: * May not be as readable for complex expressions * Can lead to unexpected behavior if not used carefully **Pre-conditional Check** Pros: * More explicit and predictable * Can handle more complex scenarios where order of operations matters Cons: * More verbose and less concise * Can lead to performance overhead due to the conditional check **Other Considerations** When using optional chaining, it's essential to be aware of the nullish coalescing operator (??) which can affect the behavior of expressions. For example, `obj?.a?.b?.c?.d ?? 0` will return 0 if any of the properties are null or undefined. **Library and Features** There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that modern JavaScript engines often have built-in support for optional chaining (?.) and the nullish coalescing operator (??). **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There are no special features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definition. The expressions used are standard JavaScript syntax. **Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative ways to test these benchmarks, you could consider using a different language or framework that has similar functionality. For example: * **TypeScript**: You can use TypeScript's optional chaining (?.) and nullish coalescing operator (??) features to test similar scenarios. * **Other JavaScript Engines**: You can also test the benchmarks on other JavaScript engines, such as V8 or SpiderMonkey, to see how they perform compared to Chrome 106. Keep in mind that these alternatives may not exactly replicate the behavior of Chrome 106, but they can provide a good starting point for testing and optimization.
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?