Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
if !== or === v2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
=== vs !==
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
===
var a=true; if(a===true) console.log("true"); else console.log("false");
!==
var a=false; if(a!==true) console.log("true"); else console.log("false");
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
===
!==
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, library usage, special JavaScript features or syntax, and other considerations. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark measures the performance difference between two conditional statements: `if (a === true)` and `if (a !== true)`. These are commonly used in JavaScript for equality checks. **Options Compared** Two options are being compared: 1. `if (a === true)` 2. `if (a !== true)` These options differ in the way they check for truthiness: * `===` (strict equality) checks if both values are equal, including type and value. * `!==` (non-strict inequality) checks if the two values are not equal. **Pros and Cons** 1. `if (a === true)`: * Pros: Can be more efficient in some cases, as it avoids unnecessary checks on undefined or null values. * Cons: May not work correctly for non-numeric values that have a truthy value (e.g., `"true"`). 2. `if (a !== true)`: * Pros: Handles non-numeric values with a truthy value and provides a more explicit way of checking for inequality. * Cons: May be slower due to the additional check. **Library Usage** There is no library used in this benchmark, as it only involves built-in JavaScript functions and operators. **Special JavaScript Features or Syntax** None mentioned. The benchmark focuses on basic conditional statement performance. **Other Considerations** * The benchmark measures the execution rate of each option (`ExecutionsPerSecond`), which indicates how many times each option is executed per second. * The `DevicePlatform` and `OperatingSystem` fields suggest that the benchmark was run on a desktop Windows system with Chrome 74. * The `RawUAString` field provides information about the User Agent string returned by the browser, but this information is not directly related to the benchmark's outcome. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for conditional statements in JavaScript include: * Using `let` or `const` instead of `var` (which can lead to variable hoisting issues). * Employing more modern approaches, such as using `Boolean(a)` to convert values to booleans. * Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Ramda, which provide more functional programming options for handling conditional statements. Keep in mind that the choice of alternative depends on specific use cases and performance requirements.
Related benchmarks:
Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster?
Testing for false vs === undefined
Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster2?
Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster? check for null
if vs && (condition) (false version)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?