Benchmark: NaN/Infinity shortcut vs variable

HTML Preparation code:

<!--your preparation HTML code goes here-->

Tests:

infinity shortcut
let a=1/0
infinity variable
let a=Infinity
NaN shortcut
let a=0/0
NaN variable
let a=NaN

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
infinity shortcut
infinity variable
NaN shortcut
NaN variable

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) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
infinity shortcut	181866448.0 Ops/sec
infinity variable	172695920.0 Ops/sec
NaN shortcut	172176736.0 Ops/sec
NaN variable	193176976.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark titled "NaN/Infinity shortcut vs variable" measures the performance of different ways to define and access special numerical values in JavaScript: NaN (Not-a-Number) and Infinity. The benchmark consists of comparisons between "shortcut" definitions, which calculate these values during assignment, and "variable" definitions, which assign these values directly.

### Test Cases Overview

1. **Infinity Shortcut (`let a = 1/0`)**: This test assigns the value of Infinity to the variable `a` by performing a division by zero. In JavaScript, any number divided by zero results in Infinity.

2. **Infinity Variable (`let a = Infinity`)**: This test explicitly assigns the Infinity value directly to the variable `a`.

3. **NaN Shortcut (`let a = 0/0`)**: This test assigns the value of NaN to `a` by performing a division of zero by zero. In JavaScript, any operation that does not yield a meaningful number results in NaN.

4. **NaN Variable (`let a = NaN`)**: Similar to the Infinity variable, this test directly assigns NaN to `a`.

### Performance Comparison

The benchmark measures the number of times each assignment can be executed per second (ExecutionsPerSecond). Based on the latest results:

- **NaN Variable**: 193,176,976 executions per second
- **Infinity Shortcut**: 181,866,448 executions per second
- **Infinity Variable**: 172,695,920 executions per second
- **NaN Shortcut**: 172,176,736 executions per second

### Pros and Cons of Each Approach

#### Infinity Shortcut vs. Infinity Variable
- **Infinity Shortcut Pros**: This method may be more intuitive for those who are familiar with mathematical operations, as it represents finding Infinity through computation.
- **Infinity Shortcut Cons**: It might be slightly slower than the direct assignment in some test environments due to the overhead of performing the division operation.

- **Infinity Variable Pros**: Direct assignment is straightforward and can be marginally faster since it doesn't involve computation.
- **Infinity Variable Cons**: No real con here, but it may be less illustrative in contexts where showing the operation is preferable.

#### NaN Shortcut vs. NaN Variable
- **NaN Shortcut Pros**: The division operation succinctly indicates the nature of NaN (an invalid number), making it clearer in certain contexts.
- **NaN Shortcut Cons**: Similar to the Infinity shortcut, it may have a performance overhead due to the operation being evaluated.

- **NaN Variable Pros**: Direct assignment results in efficient performance and less ambiguity.
- **NaN Variable Cons**: This method does not provide immediate insight into how NaN can be produced via operations.

### Other Considerations

The benchmarks suggest that for performance-critical applications, especially those that require the frequent use of these special values, using direct variable assignments may yield better performance. However, the choice between the shortcut and variable approach may ultimately depend on clarity, intention, and context in which the code is used.

### Alternatives

Other alternative approaches to handling NaN and Infinity include:
- Using helper functions that perform checks or conversions.
- Employing libraries like **Lodash** or **Underscore** that provide utility methods to work with numerical values, including functions for detecting NaN or processing infinity, although simple scenarios like the test cases here don't necessarily require such complexity.
- Leveraging TypeScript for type safety and better handling of NaN and Infinity through type definitions, which can help ensure that numeric operations don't lead to unexpected behaviors.

In conclusion, this benchmark offers a very focused analysis of performance within the context of NaN and Infinity, and while performance may vary slightly based on method of assignment, the differences may not be significant in most real-world applications unless performance is critical.

Related benchmarks:

NaN/Infinity shortcut vs variable (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: infinity shortcut vs infinity variable vs NaN shortcut vs NaN variable

Created: one month ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

infinity shortcut

infinity variable

NaN shortcut

NaN variable

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one month ago):