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?

Run this test again Return to test menu

Historical Results

Based on (10) saved test runs, The test labeled "(bool)" was (on average) the faster by 0.0161 seconds, (2.013% faster)

(bool) 100%

!empty() 97.987%

The (bool) test took 0.7857 seconds.
The !empty() test took 0.8018 seconds.

Nitty-Gritty

Each test case ran 20 random code order iterations consisting of 199,178 loops for a total of 3,983,566 runs.

Line execution difference (0.000004) milliseconds.
Avg difference (0.000) milliseconds per 199,178 loops.
Total difference 16.14 milliseconds for 3,983,566 loops

The iteration variablity for Code 1 was (0.0000) milliseconds and Code 2 was (0.0000) 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