Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
asdasdasdasdsadasd
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
is vs IIFE vs typeof vs void
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
is
let x; Object.is(x,undefined)
IIFE
let x; x === (function(window, undefined){ // undefined }(this))
typeof
let x; typeof(x) === 'undefined'
void
let x; x === void(0)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
is
IIFE
typeof
void
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 benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition with no specific test case or script preparation code. It seems that this is a basic template for creating a new benchmark on MeasureThat.net. **Individual Test Cases** There are four test cases: 1. `is` * Benchmark Definition: `let x; Object.is(x, undefined)` 2. `IIFE` (Immediately Invoked Function Expression) * Benchmark Definition: `let x; x === (function(window, undefined){\r\n // undefined\r\n}(this))` 3. `typeof` * Benchmark Definition: `let x; typeof(x) === 'undefined'` 4. `void` * Benchmark Definition: `let x; x === void(0)` **What's being tested?** Each test case is comparing the execution time of a specific JavaScript construct: 1. `is`: The comparison operator `Object.is()` (introduced in ECMAScript 2015). 2. `IIFE`: An Immediately Invoked Function Expression (IIFE) with an anonymous function that checks for `undefined`. 3. `typeof`: The `typeof` operator, which returns the type of a variable. 4. `void`: A comparison with `void(0)`, which is equivalent to `false`. **Options compared** Each test case compares two options: 1. `is`: `Object.is()` vs. a simple equality check (`x === undefined`) 2. `IIFE`: The IIFE with the anonymous function vs. a direct assignment (`x = undefined`) 3. `typeof`: The `typeof` operator vs. a string literal comparison (`typeof(x) === 'undefined'`) 4. `void`: `void(0)` vs. a simple equality check (`x === void(0)`) **Pros and Cons** Here are some general pros and cons of each approach: 1. `is`: * Pros: `Object.is()` is designed to handle NaN (Not a Number) and Infinity values, making it more robust than a simple equality check. * Cons: It might be slower due to its additional checks. 2. `IIFE`: * Pros: The IIFE allows for more control over the execution environment and can help avoid global variable pollution. * Cons: It's often unnecessary and may add complexity to the code. 3. `typeof`: * Pros: The `typeof` operator is a standard part of JavaScript and provides a clear way to check the type of a variable. * Cons: It might not work as expected for certain types, like functions or objects. 4. `void`: * Pros: Using `void(0)` is a concise and efficient way to represent falsey values. * Cons: It's not immediately clear what this syntax means, especially for developers unfamiliar with JavaScript. **Library** There are no external libraries used in these test cases. **Special JS features or syntax** None of the test cases use special JS features or syntax. They only rely on standard JavaScript constructs and operators. **Other alternatives** If you wanted to compare other options, here are a few examples: * Instead of `Object.is()`, you could use `===` for equality checks. * For IIFE, you could compare it to a direct assignment (`x = undefined`) or another type of function invocation (e.g., `new Function('return undefined;')()`). * For `typeof`, you could compare it to other type-checking methods like `instanceof` or `constructor`. * For `void`, you could compare it to other falsey values, such as `false`, `0`, or an empty string (`''`). Keep in mind that these alternatives might change the behavior of your benchmark and affect its accuracy.
Related benchmarks:
safdfsda
sdfasdfasdf
IndexOf vs Includes vs lodash includes v3
reduce me test 000009
reduce spread vs reduce
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?