Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
dsgfhtere453egrfv
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Nullish coalescing vs Logical OR
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var nullValue = null; var undefinedValue; var trueValue = true;
Tests:
Nullish coalescing
(nullValue ?? undefinedValue ?? trueValue);
Logical OR
(nullValue || undefinedValue || trueValue);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Nullish coalescing
Logical OR
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):
Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested. The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark, which is a small program designed to measure the performance of specific JavaScript features or libraries. In this case, there are two test cases: "Nullish coalescing" and "Logical OR". **Options Being Compared** In both test cases, we have three options being compared: 1. `nullValue` 2. `undefinedValue` 3. `trueValue` The nullish coalescing test checks the performance of using the nullish coalescing operator (`??`) to resolve these values. The logical OR test checks the performance of using the logical OR operator (`||`). **Pros and Cons of Different Approaches** **Nullish Coalescing Operator (??)** * Pros: + More modern and efficient way to handle null or undefined values. + Avoids unnecessary comparisons with `if` statements. * Cons: + May be less readable for some developers, especially those who are not familiar with this operator. + Requires a modern JavaScript engine that supports this operator (most modern browsers and Node.js versions do). **Logical OR Operator (`||`)** * Pros: + Widely supported and easily readable by most developers. + Works in older JavaScript engines. * Cons: + May be slower than the nullish coalescing operator, especially for more complex expressions. **Other Considerations** In both test cases, we're using a simple script that assigns values to variables. The actual benchmarking comes from the way these variables are used in the expression. For example, in the "Nullish Coalescing" test, the expression `(nullValue ?? undefinedValue ?? trueValue)` will try to resolve `undefinedValue` if `nullValue` is not null or undefined, and then use `trueValue` if `undefinedValue` is also not defined. This requires a single comparison operation, which can be faster than using logical OR (`||`). In the "Logical OR" test, the expression `(nullValue || undefinedValue || trueValue)` will perform three separate comparisons to determine the truthiness of each value. **Library or Special JS Feature Used** Neither of these test cases uses any specific library. However, they do utilize a modern JavaScript feature: nullish coalescing (`??`). Nullish coalescing is a relatively new operator introduced in ECMAScript 2020 (ES12). It allows you to use the nullish coalescing operator to handle null or undefined values in a more concise way. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in testing other JavaScript features or libraries, here are some alternatives: * For async/await syntax: You can modify the script preparation code to include an async function that uses await. * For strict mode: You can add the `strict` option to the benchmark definition and use strict mode functions like `with (strict) { ... }`. * For specific libraries or frameworks: You can replace the script preparation code with code that uses a library like React, Angular, or Vue.js. Keep in mind that each alternative will require modifications to the benchmark definition and test cases.
Related benchmarks:
Return true vs empty body
Nullish coalescing vs logical OR operators
null checking
type coercion
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?