var a = [Array(100)].map(_ => Math.random());
var ta = (new Float64Array(100)).map(_ => Math.random());
a.sort();
ta.sort();
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
array sort | |
typedArray sort |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
array sort | 43861.7 Ops/sec |
typedArray sort | 671559.6 Ops/sec |
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.
The provided JSON benchmark definition represents a test case that compares two approaches: using an array and using Float64Array
to create a typed array. The "Script Preparation Code" section shows how these arrays are initialized with 100 random numbers each.
What is tested?
In this test, we're comparing the performance of sorting an array versus a Float64Array
. Both data structures have a similar structure and use case, but they differ in their underlying representation. The goal is to determine which approach is faster for small datasets.
Options compared:
We have two main options being compared:
Pros and Cons:
Library and its purpose:
In the provided test case, the Float64Array
is used, which is a built-in JavaScript type. Its primary purpose is to provide an efficient way to perform arithmetic operations on large numbers of 64-bit floating-point values.
Special JS feature or syntax:
There are no special features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The focus is solely on comparing the performance of arrays and Float64Array
for sorting small datasets.
Other alternatives:
If you're interested in exploring other options, here are a few:
Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be directly relevant to this specific benchmark, but they demonstrate the diversity of options available in JavaScript for numerical computations.