Benchmark: IF or AND - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

function iff(){
    if(1 == 1){
        if(2==2){
            if(3==3){
                return true;
            }
        }
    }
}

function annd(){
	if(1 == 1 && 2==2 && 3==3){
		return true;
	}
}

Tests:

IF CASE
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++){ iff(); }
AND
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++){ annd(); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
IF CASE
AND

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/140.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 140 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
IF CASE	1503782.6 Ops/sec
AND	1698678.1 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

The provided JSON represents two benchmark definitions:

1. **Script Preparation Code**: The script contains two functions: `iff()` and `annd()`. These functions are used to test conditional statements, specifically "IF" and "AND". However, upon closer inspection, it appears that the conditionals are always true (`1 == 1`, `2==2`, and `3==3`), making them redundant. Nevertheless, these functions will be executed as part of each benchmark.

2. **Html Preparation Code**: This is empty in both cases, which means no HTML setup or teardown code is required for the benchmarks.

Now, let's explore what options are being compared:

**Benchmark 1: "IF CASE"**

* The `for` loop iterates 1000 times, calling the `iff()` function on each iteration.
* Since the conditionals within `iff()` are always true, this benchmark primarily tests the performance of executing a large number of function calls.

**Benchmark 2: "AND"**

* Similar to Benchmark 1, the `for` loop iterates 1000 times, calling the `annd()` function on each iteration.
* This benchmark also primarily tests the performance of executing a large number of function calls.

Pros and Cons:

* **Efficiency**: Both benchmarks measure the execution speed of the functions, but since the conditionals are always true, they don't provide meaningful insights into conditional statement performance. However, they do give an idea of how fast a browser can execute a large number of function calls.
* **Relevance**: These benchmarks might be useful for understanding the browser's ability to handle repetitive tasks or for benchmarking JavaScript engine-specific optimizations.

Considerations:

* The always-true conditionals make these benchmarks less relevant for evaluating conditional statement performance.
* It would be more interesting to see benchmarks with meaningful, variable conditions.

**Library usage**

There are no libraries used in the provided JSON.

**Special JS features or syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definitions.

Now, let's consider alternative alternatives:

1. **Benchmarks for conditional statements**: MeasureThe.net could provide benchmarks that test different types of conditional statements, such as `if` with variable conditions, ternary operators (`? :`), or more complex logical expressions.
2. **Function call overhead**: The benchmark results can be used to compare the execution speed of different JavaScript engines on various hardware configurations.
3. **JavaScript engine-specific optimizations**: MeasureThe.net could provide benchmarks that focus on specific JavaScript engine features, such as `let`, `const`, or arrow functions, to evaluate their performance implications.

By expanding on these alternative ideas, MeasureThat.net can provide more comprehensive and relevant benchmarking for software engineers interested in optimizing JavaScript code.

Related benchmarks:

IF or AND (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: IF CASE vs AND

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

IF CASE

AND

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):