I have just run a very simple JavaScript performance test (don't ask why). The test declares a variable, but doesn't assign anything to it:
var x;
It then compares the speed of comparing the value variable to null, and to undefined, in other words:
var y = (x == null); and var y = (x == undefined);. 
I was expecting the comparison with undefined to be the fasted. In fact it was nowhere near. The comparison with null was far and away the fastest, around 80% faster.
The results I've described above come from running the tests in Chrome (version 13). Running them in Firefox produces results far closer to what I would have expected (the comparison with undefined is faster than with null, albeit very marginally).
So, my question is what could the cause of this be? Why does Chrome seem to favour the comparison with null so greatly?
For quick reference, here's a screenshot of the results:

Only use null if you explicitly want to denote the value of a variable as having "no value". As @com2gz states: null is used to define something programmatically empty. undefined is meant to say that the reference is not existing. A null value has a defined reference to "nothing".
Comparing Equality of Null and Undefined Values Null and undefined values are equal when compared using the JavaScript equality operator. Use the equality operator (==) to compare if null and undefined values are equal in JavaScript.
In JavaScript, undefined is a type, whereas null an object. It means a variable declared, but no value has been assigned a value. Whereas, null in JavaScript is an assignment value. You can assign it to a variable.
null and undefined both return false . That's why your code is actually checking if false is equal to false . However their types are not equal. Because of that, the next statement will return false, as the === comparison operator checks both the types and their value.
null is a reserved keyword which cannot be overriden, so when you are doing a comparison against null, all you have to do is a single comparison. 
However, when you are checking against undefined, the engine must do a type lookup and then a comparison, meaning that it is actually slightly more demanding. 
If you need to actually check to see if something is undefined, you should use
if(typeof notSet == "undefined"){ }   Try it... and set something to null in your JavaScript console.
null = "will error"; // Errors with --> ReferenceError: invalid assignment left-hand side   However, if you try and do it with undefined, it won't error. That is not to say that you can override undefined, because you can't, but that undefined is its own primitive type.
The only real similarity between null and undefined, is that they can both be coerced into a boolean false.
if i think well, they are not the same. so you can't use null instead of undefined.
typeof !== "undefined" vs. != null
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With