Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
check args length
(version: 1)
Comparing performance of:
length vs "in" operator
Created:
11 months ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<!--your preparation HTML code goes here-->
Script Preparation code:
function a(){ return arguments.length > 3 } function b(){ return 3 in arguments }
Tests:
length
a() a(1) a(1,1) a(1,1,1) a(1,1,1,1)
"in" operator
b() b(1) b(1,1) b(1,1,1) b(1,1,1,1)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
length
"in" operator
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
11 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/137.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 137 on Linux
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
length
195858784.0 Ops/sec
"in" operator
185499200.0 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
gpt-4o-mini
, generated 11 months ago):
The benchmark focuses on comparing two different methods of determining the length of the `arguments` object in JavaScript functions: using the `arguments.length` property and the `in` operator. ### Benchmark Overview The provided benchmark consists of two JavaScript functions, `a` and `b`, which evaluate the length of the `arguments` object in terms of performance: - **Function `a`:** Checks if the number of arguments is greater than 3 by using `arguments.length`. - **Function `b`:** Checks if the index `3` exists in the `arguments` object using the `in` operator. ### Test Cases 1. **Test Name:** "length" - **Benchmark Definition:** - Calls the function `a()` with different numbers of arguments: `a()`, `a(1)`, `a(1,1)`, `a(1,1,1)`, and `a(1,1,1,1)`. 2. **Test Name:** "\"in\" operator" - **Benchmark Definition:** - Calls the function `b()` with the same number of arguments as in test case one: `b()`, `b(1)`, `b(1,1)`, `b(1,1,1)`, and `b(1,1,1,1)`. ### Performance Results - **Executions Per Second for `a()` (length check):** 195,858,784 - **Executions Per Second for `b()` (in operator check):** 185,499,200 ### Comparison of Approaches - **`arguments.length` (Function `a`):** - **Pros:** - Directly retrieves the length of the `arguments` object, which is straightforward and generally optimized by JavaScript engines. - More readable and clear in intent, which improves the maintainability of the code. - **Cons:** - None significant in terms of performance; however, it does involve a direct property access which might theoretically slow down in very specific edge cases (not typically seen in practice). - **`in` Operator (Function `b`):** - **Pros:** - Can be used to check any property within an object, which makes it versatile in certain contexts. - **Cons:** - Generally less efficient for simply counting arguments. It requires checking for the existence of a specific index rather than retrieving a property length, making it slower in this specific context. - Less clear in code readability since it introduces a concept of existence rather than quantity, potentially confusing the intent. ### Alternatives Other alternatives to determine the number of arguments passed to a function include: - **Spread Syntax:** Using the rest operator (e.g., `function c(...args) { return args.length; }`). This would create an array of arguments and return its length but introduces array construction overhead. - **Array.from(arguments):** Similar to spread syntax, this converts the `arguments` object into an actual array, allowing more array methods to be used but also introduces extra overhead. ### Conclusion The benchmark shows that accessing `arguments.length` is a more performant approach for checking the number of arguments in function calls compared to using the `in` operator. The tests indicate that while both methods eventually achieve the same goal, `arguments.length` is significantly faster in this context. Understanding and using the correct method for checking argument counts is essential for writing efficient JavaScript code.
Related benchmarks:
For-loop
For-loop
Anonymous Function in Loop
Anonymous Function in Loop
Anonymous Function in Loop
iawegoijawgoij
Anonymous Function in Loop 2
Object parameters 2
call vs if
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?