Benchmark: Boolean vs > - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

const arr = ['1', '2', '3', '4'];

Tests:

Test1
arr.length > 2
Test2
Boolean(arr[2])

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Test1
Test2

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
Test1	179457120.0 Ops/sec
Test2	180307216.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark titled "Boolean vs >" tests two different approaches to evaluate conditions in JavaScript: using comparison operators (`>`) versus type conversion utilizing the `Boolean` function.

### Benchmark Overview

**Script Preparation Code:**
```javascript
const arr = ['1', '2', '3', '4'];
```
This code prepares an array `arr` containing string elements `'1'`, `'2'`, `'3'`, and `'4'`, which will be leveraged in the benchmark tests.

### Test Cases

**1. Test Case: `arr.length > 2` (Test1)**
- **Functionality:** This condition checks if the length of the array `arr` is greater than 2. The expression yields a boolean value (`true` or `false`).
- **Performance Factor:** This approach is straightforward, relying on the built-in property `length` of arrays. It directly compares two numbers, which is generally efficient in terms of execution speed.

**Pros:**
- Simple and easy to read.
- No overhead for conversion or type coercion.

**Cons:**
- Limited to checking the length property, and won't accommodate other scenarios where validation methods may be needed.

**2. Test Case: `Boolean(arr[2])` (Test2)**
- **Functionality:** This expression uses the `Boolean` constructor to evaluate whether `arr[2]` (which is the string `'3'`) is truthy or falsy. In JavaScript, non-empty strings are truthy.
- **Performance Factor:** This involves an explicit conversion of a value to a boolean type.

**Pros:**
- This method can be used to assess any value's truthiness, providing flexibility in validating different types of data beyond just array lengths.

**Cons:**
- The `Boolean` conversion can be slower due to the additional computational overhead when compared to a simple comparison operation.
- The use of the `Boolean` constructor might be less intuitive compared to plain comparison operators.

### Benchmark Results
The benchmark results show the execution speed for both test cases.

- **Test1 (arr.length > 2):** Executed at approximately 179,457,120 times per second.
- **Test2 (Boolean(arr[2]):** Executed at approximately 180,307,216 times per second.

From the test results, it appears that `Boolean(arr[2])` performed slightly better in terms of execution speed, but the difference is marginal and likely falls within the curiosity or variability of performance measurement.

### Other Alternatives
Beyond these two approaches, other methods could be employed for similar evaluations:

1. **Logical Operators:** 
   - Using logical checks like `if (arr.length) {...}` to determine if the array has elements could be another alternative.
  
2. **Type Coercion:**
   - Implicit coercion could be used (e.g., `if (arr.length)`) directly checks the truthiness of the length without explicitly using `Boolean`.

3. **Different Conditions:**
   - More complex conditions involving array methods (e.g., using `Array.prototype.some()` to check content) may also yield different performance characteristics based on the context.

In conclusion, both approaches have their place in JavaScript. The choice between them depends on the specific scenario, readability, performance needs, and the data being evaluated. Understanding the implications and characteristics of these approaches can guide software engineers in choosing the right method for their tasks.

Related benchmarks:

Boolean vs > (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Test1 vs Test2

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Test1

Test2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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