Benchmark: filter vs if - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

filter
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].filter((v) => v != 2)
if
if (2 != 2) {}

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
filter
if

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/136.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 136 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
filter	65707548.0 Ops/sec
if	214268560.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the test cases and explain what is being tested on MeasureThat.net.

The benchmark tests two different approaches to check if a number is not equal to 2:

**Approach 1: Using `filter()`**

The first test case uses the `filter()` method:
```javascript
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].filter((v) => v != 2)
```
This code creates a new array containing only the elements that do not meet the condition `v != 2`. In this case, it will exclude the number 2 from the original array.

**Approach 2: Using an `if` statement**

The second test case uses a simple `if` statement:
```javascript
if (2 != 2) {}
```
This code checks if the condition `2 != 2` is true, and if it is, it executes the empty block of code inside the `if` statement.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Filter() approach:** This approach is more concise and readable. It also has a lower memory overhead since it only creates a new array with the filtered elements.
*   However, this approach may be slower than the `if` statement approach since it involves creating a new array and iterating over its elements.
*   The `if` statement approach can be faster in some cases because it avoids the overhead of creating a new array.

**Other considerations:**

*   Both approaches are straightforward to understand, making them suitable for beginners and experienced developers alike.
*   The use of an array filter or an `if` statement is not specific to JavaScript; these patterns are used in many programming languages to perform conditional checks.

**Library usage:**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, the `filter()` method is a built-in JavaScript method that works on arrays.

**Special JS features or syntax:**

The benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax. The code uses standard JavaScript constructs such as arrays and conditional statements.

**Alternative approaches:**

Other alternatives to these two approaches include:

*   Using regular expressions with `Array.prototype.every()`:
```javascript
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].every((v) => !/(2)/.test(v))
```
*   Using a `forEach` loop with an `if` statement inside the callback function:
```javascript
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6].forEach(function (v) {
    if (v != 2) {
        // do something
    }
})
```
These approaches may be less readable or more memory-intensive than the original `filter()` and `if` statement examples.

In summary, the MeasureThat.net benchmark tests two common approaches to check if a number is not equal to 2: using `filter()` and an `if` statement. While both approaches have their pros and cons, they are straightforward to understand and suitable for a wide range of developers.

Related benchmarks:

filter vs if (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: filter vs if

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

filter

if

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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