Test: (bool) vs. !empty

According to the documentation, empty is like isset and a reverse bool cast. Perhaps together, those are faster than the cost of the ! on empty?

View test history (1) Run this test again Return to test menu

Result: Discarded

The test labeled "!empty()" was the faster by 0.0361 seconds, (2.728% faster)

!empty() 100%

(bool) 97.272%

The !empty() test took 1.2866 seconds.
The (bool) test took 1.3227 seconds.

Nitty-Gritty

Each test case ran 20 random code order iterations consisting of 289,063 loops for a total of 5,781,260 runs.

Line execution difference (0.000006) milliseconds.
Avg difference (1.804) milliseconds per 289,063 loops.
Total difference 36.09 milliseconds for 5,781,260 loops

The iteration variablity for Code 1 was (9.1128) milliseconds and Code 2 was (10.8634) milliseconds. The lower and the closer together there values are the more accurate the results are.

Code

The first test, "(bool)", was:

for ($j = 0; $j < 1000; $j++)
{
	$i = '1';
	$GLOBALS['dummy'] = isset($i) && (bool) $i;
}

The second test, "!empty()", was:

for ($j = 0; $j < 1000; $j++)
{
	$i = '1';
	$GLOBALS['dummy'] = !empty($i);
}

PHP Benchmarks