Benchmark: if else vs switch case vs indexOf

Script Preparation code:

var X = 0;
var arr = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];

Tests:

if
if (X < 0) { X++; } else { X++; }
switch
switch (X) { case 1: X++; break; case 2: X++; break; default: X++; }
indexOf
X++; X = arr.indexOf(X);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
if
switch
indexOf

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:147.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/147.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 147 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
if	77216576.0 Ops/sec
switch	61829164.0 Ops/sec
indexOf	7223846.5 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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different approaches to increment `X`:

1. **If-Else Statement**: The first approach uses an if-else statement to check if `X` is less than 0, and if so, increments it.
2. **Switch Statement**: The second approach uses a switch statement to determine which case to execute, and in this case, increments `X`.
3. **IndexOf Method**: The third approach uses the `indexOf()` method of the array `arr` to find the index of `X`, and if found, increments it.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these three approaches on a variable `X` initialized with 0, within an array `arr`.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **If-Else Statement**:
	* Pros: Simple to understand and implement, easy to maintain.
	* Cons: May lead to slower performance if not optimized (e.g., using early returns).
2. **Switch Statement**:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient than if-else statements for multiple cases, but may require more maintenance.
	* Cons: Requires the programmer to specify all possible cases, which can be error-prone and difficult to manage for complex scenarios.
3. **IndexOf Method**:
	* Pros: Efficient for arrays with unique elements or when searching for a specific element.
	* Cons: May lead to slower performance if the array is large or has many duplicate elements.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark doesn't consider other factors that might affect performance, such as:

* Array size and structure (e.g., sparse arrays, object arrays)
* Data types and values of `X` and `arr`
* Browser optimizations and caching
* CPU architecture and execution order

**Library Used**

None explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's likely that JavaScript engines like V8 (used by Chrome) and SpiderMonkey (used by Firefox) are involved.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The use of `++` operator for incrementing `X` is a common JavaScript idiom. The `indexOf()` method is also a standard array method in modern JavaScript.

**Alternatives**

To create similar benchmarks, you could consider using other approaches, such as:

* Using loops (e.g., `for`, `while`) instead of conditional statements
* Employing bitwise operations for incrementing `X`
* Utilizing compiler optimizations or JIT compilers to analyze and compare performance

Related benchmarks:

if else vs switch case vs indexOf (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: if vs switch vs indexOf

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

if

switch

indexOf

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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