Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
isNaN vs +
(version: 0)
Compare tests
Comparing performance of:
Number.isNaN vs + operator
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Number.isNaN
Number.isNaN('1000')
+ operator
!!(+'1000')
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Number.isNaN
+ operator
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 break down the benchmark and its components. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case for measuring performance differences between two approaches: 1. `Number.isNaN('1000')` 2. `!!(+'1000')` **What is tested?** These two test cases compare the performance of using the `Number.isNaN()` method to check if a number is NaN (Not a Number) with the use of the unary plus operator (`+`) to cast a string to a number. **Options compared** The two options being compared are: 1. **`Number.isNaN('1000')`**: This approach uses the `Number.isNaN()` method, which returns a boolean value indicating whether the input is NaN. 2. **`!!(+'1000')`**: This approach uses the unary plus operator (`+`) to cast the string `'1000'` to a number, and then applies the logical NOT operator (`!!`) to convert the result to a boolean. **Pros and Cons of each approach** 1. `Number.isNaN('1000')`: * Pros: + More readable and maintainable code. + Easier to understand the intent of the code. * Cons: + May be slower due to the overhead of calling a method. 2. `!!(+'1000')`: * Pros: + Potential performance benefits due to fewer function calls. * Cons: + Less readable and maintainable code. + May lead to errors if not properly understood. **Library used** There is no specific library mentioned in the provided JSON. However, it's worth noting that `Number.isNaN()` is a built-in JavaScript method. **Special JS feature or syntax** There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. **Other alternatives** To test similar performance differences, alternative approaches could include: 1. Using a different method to check for NaN, such as `typeof NaN === 'number' && x !== NaN`. 2. Comparing the performance of using a library like Lodash's `isNaN` function. 3. Testing the performance of using other numerical functions or operators. In general, benchmarking JavaScript performance involves testing various aspects of the language and its implementations to determine which approach is most efficient in different scenarios.
Related benchmarks:
Native isNaN() vs Custom isNaN method
typeof number vs. Number.isNan vs. isNan
typeof x === 'number' vs isNaN(x) rtestset22
typeof number vs. Number.isNan vs. isNan vs self comparison
typeof number vs. Number.isNan vs. isNan vs self comparison. Versus let
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?