Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Number constructor vs naive compare
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
naive compare vs Number constructor
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var a = true; var b = false;
Tests:
naive compare
const result = (a === b ? 0 : a < b ? -1 : 1);
Number constructor
Number(a) - Number(b)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
naive compare
Number constructor
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 years ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 126 on Linux
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=529694" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
naive compare
2.7M/s
Number constructor
1.9M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
naive compare
2,681,516 Ops/sec
Number constructor
1,867,694 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is a JSON object that contains information about the benchmark to be performed. The relevant details are: * `Name`: A unique name for the benchmark. * `Description`: An optional description of the benchmark, which is not filled in this case. * `Script Preparation Code`: A snippet of JavaScript code that is executed before running the benchmark. In this case, it initializes two boolean variables, `a` and `b`, to `true` and `false`, respectively. * `Html Preparation Code`: An optional HTML code that can be used to prepare the page for the benchmark, which is not required in this case. **Individual Test Cases** There are two test cases: 1. **Naive Compare** The first test case uses the following JavaScript code: ```javascript const result = (a === b ? 0 : a < b ? -1 : 1); ``` This code compares the values of `a` and `b` using the `===` operator, which checks for both equality and type. If they are equal, it returns 0. If `a` is less than `b`, it returns -1. Otherwise, it returns 1. Pros: * Simple and easy to understand. * Directly compares values without creating unnecessary objects or functions. Cons: * May involve additional overhead due to the comparison operation. 2. **Number Constructor** The second test case uses the following JavaScript code: ```javascript Number(a) - Number(b) ``` This code converts `a` and `b` to numbers using the `Number()` constructor and then subtracts one from the other. Pros: * Uses a well-defined and standardized function for converting values to numbers. * Can be optimized by the engine, as it's a built-in operator. Cons: * May incur additional overhead due to the creation of temporary objects or functions. * The engine may not optimize this expression as much as the simple comparison in the first test case. **Libraries and Special Features** There are no libraries used in these benchmark definitions. However, the `Number()` constructor is a built-in JavaScript function that's widely supported by most browsers and engines. **Other Considerations** The use of `===` for comparison in the first test case may be considered less efficient than using the `Number()` constructor in the second test case. This is because `===` involves additional operations to check both equality and type, whereas the `Number()` constructor can be optimized by the engine to directly convert values to numbers. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for comparing values could include: * Using `if (a < b) { ... } else if (b < a) { ... }` or similar constructs to avoid relying on the `===` operator. * Implementing custom comparison functions using JavaScript's `Function()` constructor and `apply()`. * Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Ramda for functional programming and comparisons. However, these alternatives may introduce additional complexity and overhead, making them less suitable for benchmarking purposes.
Related benchmarks
Check object. typeof vs constructor
Math.max/min vs if vs ternary operatorsd
typeof number vs. Number.isNan vs. isNan vs self comparison. Versus let
Math.min vs if/else vs ternary operator test 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?