Shaving Bytes with JavaScript Booleans
Developers are always search for ultimate way to create something with the least amount of code. This, of course, is one of the reasons we use minifiers: to serve code as small as possible. Of course this practice has numerous benefits, like faster download time, less storage consumption, etc. One way that minifiers are able to shave bytes off of JavaScript code is changing the way booleans are used.
true === !0 // Save 2 chars
false === !1 // Save 3 chars
A few bytes of every true and false go away with the ! evaluation. If you set one-letter variables names to those values, you may end up saving more. Keep in mind I'm not telling you to do this in your source code -- minifiers like Uglify JS will do this for you. Just something neat to know about though!
![CSS @supports]()
Feature detection via JavaScript is a client side best practice and for all the right reasons, but unfortunately that same functionality hasn't been available within CSS. What we end up doing is repeating the same properties multiple times with each browser prefix. Yuck. Another thing we...
![Welcome to My New Office]()
My first professional web development was at a small print shop where I sat in a windowless cubical all day. I suffered that boxed in environment for almost five years before I was able to find a remote job where I worked from home. The first...
![Create Spinning, Fading Icons with CSS3 and MooTools]()
A goal of my latest blog redesign was to practice what I preached a bit more; add a bit more subtle flair. One of the ways I accomplished that was by using CSS3 animations to change the display of my profile icons (RSS, GitHub, etc.) I...
![Redacted Font]()
Back when I created client websites, one of the many things that frustrated me was the initial design handoff. It would always go like this:
Work hard to incorporate client's ideas, dream up awesome design.
Create said design, using Lorem Ipsum text
Send initial design concept to the client...
Cool :-)
Glad you aren’t advocating coding like this directly. Can’t beat true/false for readability.
Coercions like
NumbertoBooleandoesn’t affect performance?Maybe too simple of a test: http://jsperf.com/bool-num-test
Looks like using
!0and!1may be faster (in Chrome 35) but only marginally.Even if that’s true, and it’s not due to some statistical error, the gain is so small it’s not really worth it.
Those are noops anyway. I would be surprised if the JS engine just optimise them away at compile time.
didn’t just*
Still prefer true/false for readability. As you said, it is better to let the Minifier to do this for us. It is better to keep the true/false in our code.
I expect the gain to be lost as soon as the file gets gzipped. I am wrong?
You should also remember the bitwise operations like
!~number, that returns true only for -1