Benchmark: qqqqssss - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {a: {b: {c: {d: 1}}}}

Tests:

asdadasdasdasd
(obj.a == null ? undefined : obj.a.b == null ? undefined : obj.a.b.c == null ? undefined : obj.a.b.c.d) || 2
asdasdsadasdas
_.get(obj, "a.b.c.d", 2)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
asdadasdasdasd
asdasdsadasdas

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases for you.

**What is tested:**

The test cases measure the performance of JavaScript code in evaluating specific expressions using different approaches.

**Options compared:**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Direct comparison with null checks**: This option uses a series of null checks to determine if the value of `obj.a.b.c.d` is not null or undefined.
```javascript
(obj.a == null ? undefined : obj.a.b == null ? undefined : obj.a.b.c == null ? undefined : obj.a.b.c.d) || 2
```
Pros:

* This approach allows for explicit null checks, which can be useful in certain scenarios.

Cons:

* It's more verbose and may lead to errors if not implemented correctly.
* The number of operations increases with the depth of the object, leading to slower performance.

2. **Lodash _.get() method**: This option uses the Lodash library's `_.get()` method to access the nested property values in a more concise way.
```javascript
_.get(obj, "a.b.c.d", 2)
```
Pros:

* It's more concise and easier to read.
* The `_` symbol indicates that it's a part of the Lodash library.

Cons:

* It relies on the Lodash library, which may introduce additional overhead.
* It may not be as performant as direct comparison with null checks for simple cases.

**Library usage:**

In both test cases, the Lodash library is used. The `_get()` method is a part of Lodash's utility functions, and it's used to access nested properties in an object.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

None mentioned.

**Benchmark preparation code:**

The script preparation code creates an object `obj` with nested properties:
```javascript
var obj = {a: {b: {c: {d: 1}}}}
```
This object is used as the input for both test cases.

**Other alternatives:**

In addition to the two options being compared, there may be other approaches that could be used to evaluate the expressions. Some possible alternatives include:

* Using a recursive function to traverse the object instead of null checks.
* Using a library like Ramda or Underscore.js to provide alternative utility functions for accessing nested properties.
* Implementing a custom solution using only built-in JavaScript features.

**Considerations:**

When writing performance benchmarks, it's essential to consider factors such as:

* Test case complexity and relevance
* Number of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond)
* Raw UA string (browser and device information)
* Device platform and operating system

By considering these factors and using relevant libraries or features, developers can write accurate and reliable performance benchmarks that help identify areas for optimization in their code.

Related benchmarks:

qqqqssss (version: 0)

aaaaa

Comparing performance of: asdadasdasdasd vs asdasdsadasdas

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

asdadasdasdasd

asdasdsadasdas

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):