Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
number vs typeof
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
isNumber vs typeof
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
isNumber
Number.isFinite(Math.random())
typeof
typeof (Math.random()) === 'number'
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
isNumber
typeof
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; rv:141.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/141.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 141 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=615408" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
typeof
672.8M/s
isNumber
564.6M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
typeof
672,755,520 Ops/sec
isNumber
564,556,032 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down what's being tested in the provided benchmark. **Main Question:** The main question being asked is whether `typeof` returns `'number'` when passed the result of `Math.random()`, versus checking if the result is a finite number using `Number.isFinite()`. **Options Compared:** 1. **typeof**: This option checks if the type of the value (in this case, `Math.random()`) is `'number'`. The behavior of `typeof` can be different from what one might expect, as it returns the type of the variable at compile-time, not runtime. 2. **Number.isFinite()**: This option checks if the value (in this case, `Math.random()`) is a finite number. **Pros and Cons:** * **typeof**: * Pros: * Generally faster than using `Number.isFinite()` since it can be optimized by the JavaScript engine. * More straightforward to understand, as it directly returns the type of the value. * Cons: * May not work as expected for some edge cases, such as NaN (Not a Number) or infinity values. * **Number.isFinite()**: * Pros: * More accurate and reliable than `typeof`, especially when dealing with non-finite numbers. * Provides a more explicit way to check if a value is finite. * Cons: * Generally slower than `typeof` due to its additional checks. **Other Considerations:** * The choice between these two options largely depends on the specific use case and performance requirements. If speed is critical, using `typeof` might be a better option. However, if accuracy and reliability are more important, `Number.isFinite()` should be preferred. * Another factor to consider is that `typeof` can return `'number'` for NaN or infinity values, which may not be desirable in all cases. **Library Usage:** There is no specific library being used in this benchmark. The functions and methods mentioned (`Math.random()`, `Number.isFinite()`) are built-in JavaScript functions. **Special JS Features/Syntax:** There is no mention of any special JavaScript features or syntax in the provided code or explanation. If there were any, it would be worth explaining them to provide a better understanding of the benchmark. **Benchmark Preparation Code and Definition:** Since there's no script preparation code or detailed HTML preparation code provided, we can only focus on the provided benchmark definition and test cases.
Related benchmarks
Number.isInteger() vs typeof
typeof number vs not typeof undefined vs undefined
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?