Benchmark: Math Min Max with spread operator arr(5000)

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}

var arr = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 5000; i++){
  arr.push({value:getRandomInt(100)});
}

Tests:

Math.min assign
Math.min.apply(null, arr)
Math.min spread
Math.min(...arr)
Math.max assign
Math.max.apply(null, arr)
Math.max spread
Math.max(...arr)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.min assign
Math.min spread
Math.max assign
Math.max spread

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/89.0.4389.128 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 89 on Mac OS X 10.14.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Math.min assign	2124.1 Ops/sec
Math.min spread	2236.9 Ops/sec
Math.max assign	2244.6 Ops/sec
Math.max spread	2200.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**What is tested?**

The provided JSON represents two benchmark definitions:

1. **Script Preparation Code**: This code generates an array `arr` with 5000 random integer values between 0 and 100.
2. **Individual Test Cases**: These test cases compare different ways to find the minimum or maximum value in the generated array using the built-in `Math.min()` and `Math.max()` functions.

**Options compared**

For each benchmark definition, the following options are compared:

* For `Math.min()`: `apply(null, arr)` vs. `...arr` (spread operator)
* For `Math.max()`: `apply(null, arr)` vs. `...arr` (spread operator)

**Pros and Cons of different approaches**

1. **`apply(null, arr)`**: This approach uses the traditional function invocation syntax with `apply()` to call the function.
	* Pros: more explicit and arguably more readable for complex functions.
	* Cons: slower due to the extra function call overhead.
2. **`...arr` (spread operator)**: This approach uses the spread operator to pass the array elements as separate arguments.
	* Pros: faster, as it avoids the function call overhead.
	* Cons: less explicit and might be harder to understand for complex functions.

**Other considerations**

When choosing between `apply()` and the spread operator, consider the trade-off between readability and performance. For simple cases like finding the minimum or maximum value in an array, the spread operator is likely to be faster. However, for more complex scenarios, using `apply()` might provide better code clarity.

**Library usage**

None of the test cases use any libraries beyond the built-in JavaScript functions (`Math.min()` and `Math.max()`).

**Special JS feature or syntax**

No special features or syntax are used in these benchmark definitions. The focus is on comparing different ways to call the built-in `Math.min()` and `Math.max()` functions.

**Other alternatives**

If you want to explore alternative approaches, consider the following:

* Using a library like Lodash, which provides utility functions for iterating over arrays.
* Implementing your own custom iteration function using loops or recursion.
* Investigating other optimization techniques, such as caching or memoization, if performance is critical.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might introduce additional complexity and potential trade-offs.

Related benchmarks:

Math Min Max with spread operator arr(5000) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Math.min assign vs Math.min spread vs Math.max assign vs Math.max spread

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.min assign

Math.min spread

Math.max assign

Math.max spread

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):