Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
guard asdf
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
guard vs !!
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
guard
function guard (val) { return val !== undefined && val !== null; } guard(undefined) guard(null) guard({})
!!
!!undefined !!null
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
guard
!!
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):
I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition for a JavaScript microbenchmark. It consists of: * `Name`: A unique name for the benchmark. * `Description`: An optional description of the benchmark (not provided in this case). * `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`: Optional code that should be executed before running the test cases. Both are empty in this case. **Individual Test Cases** There are two test cases: 1. **"guard"`: The test case defines a simple JavaScript function called `guard` that takes a value `val` as an argument and returns `true` if `val` is not equal to `undefined` or `null`. The test case then calls this function with three different inputs: `undefined`, `null`, and an empty object `{}`. 2. **"!!"`**: The test case simply evaluates the expression `!!undefined` twice using double exclamation marks (`!!`). This is a common JavaScript idiom to negate the value of `undefined`. **Comparing Options** In this benchmark, there are two main options being compared: 1. The `guard` function. 2. The simple negation of `undefined` using `!!`. The pros and cons of each approach are as follows: * **"guard"`: + Pros: This implementation provides explicit checks for `undefined` and `null`, making the code more readable and maintainable. It also allows for easy modification or extension of the logic. + Cons: This approach may be slower due to the explicit checks, and it may not be as concise as other options. * **"!!"`**: + Pros: This approach is concise and can often be used as a shorthand for negating `undefined`. It's also relatively fast since it only involves a simple bitwise operation. + Cons: This approach relies on the specific behavior of JavaScript's double exclamation mark operator, which may change in future versions. It also doesn't provide explicit checks like the `guard` function does. **Other Considerations** In this benchmark, the use of `!!` is likely intended to test how JavaScript handles negating `undefined`, as well as any potential differences between browsers or implementations. If you were to write your own version of this benchmark, consider using a consistent naming convention and commenting your code clearly. You may also want to explore other variations of the `guard` function, such as using a more concise implementation or incorporating additional checks. **Alternatives** Some alternative approaches for testing the same functionality could include: * Using a more modern implementation of the `guard` function, such as an arrow function or a more explicit `if-else` statement. * Testing different browsers or implementations by modifying the `!!` expression to use different negation operators (e.g., `!`, `-!!`). * Incorporating additional test cases, such as testing with `NaN` values or checking for edge cases like `undefined === null`. Keep in mind that these alternatives are just suggestions, and the original implementation of `!!` is likely chosen for its simplicity and conciseness.
Related benchmarks:
Reverse array
str split vs spread (LONG STRINGS) v1
fjdfjdu34uerh
dfjf2hdshsdrh
string with + vs template literals vs String.concat 4 input
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?