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!
![5 HTML5 APIs You Didn’t Know Existed]()
When you say or read "HTML5", you half expect exotic dancers and unicorns to walk into the room to the tune of "I'm Sexy and I Know It." Can you blame us though? We watched the fundamental APIs stagnate for so long that a basic feature...
![5 Ways that CSS and JavaScript Interact That You May Not Know About]()
CSS and JavaScript: the lines seemingly get blurred by each browser release. They have always done a very different job but in the end they are both front-end technologies so they need do need to work closely. We have our .js files and our .css, but...
![Cross Browser CSS Box Shadows]()
Box shadows have been used on the web for quite a while, but they weren't created with CSS -- we needed to utilize some Photoshop game to create them. For someone with no design talent, a.k.a me, the need to use Photoshop sucked. Just because we...
![Introducing MooTools Dotter]()
It's best practice to provide an indicator of some sort when performing an AJAX request or processing that takes place in the background. Since the dawn of AJAX, we've been using colorful spinners and imagery as indicators. While I enjoy those images, I am...
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