Benchmark: Date Math - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

let startDate = new Date();

Tests:

Using Math
const getNextMonth = (startDate) => { let current; if (startDate.getMonth() == 11) { current = new Date(startDate.getFullYear() + 1, 0, 1); } else { current = new Date(startDate.getFullYear(), startDate.getMonth() + 1, 1); } return current.getMonth(); }; let startDate = new Date(); getNextMonth(startDate);
Using Date Object
const outputDate = (date, output = 'month') => { switch (output) { default: case 'month': return date.getMonth(); case 'fulldate': return date; case 'year': return date.getFullYear(); } }; const changeMonth = (current = new Date(), change) => { if (change === 0) return current; const unformatted = new Date(current).setMonth(current.getMonth() + change); const formatted = new Date(unformatted); return formatted; }; const getNextMonth = (current = new Date(), output = 'month') => { const nextMonth = changeMonth(current, 1); return outputDate(nextMonth, output); }; let startDate = new Date(); getNextMonth(startDate)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Using Math
Using Date Object

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to understand what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition represents a JavaScript function that calculates the month of a given date. There are two different implementations:

1. **Using Math**: This implementation uses mathematical calculations to determine the next month.
2. **Using Date Object**: This implementation creates a new `Date` object and manipulates its properties to calculate the next month.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches on different hardware configurations (specified by the `RawUAString`, `Browser`, `DevicePlatform`, and `OperatingSystem`) and under various execution conditions (indicated by `ExecutionsPerSecond`).

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

1. **Using Math**:
	* Pros: Simple, concise, and potentially faster due to fewer overheads.
	* Cons: May be less readable and maintainable for complex date calculations.
2. **Using Date Object**:
	* Pros: More readable, maintainable, and potentially safer, as it follows standard JavaScript date manipulation practices.
	* Cons: May have higher overheads due to creating a new `Date` object.

**Library/Function Used**

In the test cases, no libraries or external functions are used beyond the built-in `Date` object. The implementation relies solely on native JavaScript features and operations.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax (e.g., ES6+ features like `const`, `let`, arrow functions) are explicitly used in these implementations. However, the use of the `setMonth()` method, which is a part of the `Date` object, does utilize some underlying native JavaScript functionality.

**Other Alternatives**

To further improve performance or explore alternative approaches, you could consider:

1. **Just-In-Time (JIT) compilation**: Some browsers' JIT compilers can optimize code for specific hardware configurations.
2. **Ahead-of-Time (AOT) compilation**: Compiling JavaScript code to machine code before runtime can provide better performance.
3. **Parallel processing**: Running the benchmark on multiple CPU cores or using multi-threading techniques could improve execution speeds.
4. **Different date representation formats**: Experimenting with alternative date formats, such as strings or objects, might offer different performance characteristics.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may require modifications to the code and potentially incur additional overheads or complexity.

In summary, the benchmark is testing two different approaches to calculating the next month from a given date. The "Using Math" approach has some pros (faster potential) but also cons (less readable/maintainable). The "Using Date Object" approach offers more readability and maintainability but may have higher overheads.

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/95.0.4638.54 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 95 on Mac OS X 10.14.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Using Math	679929.2 Ops/sec
Using Date Object	481293.9 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Date Math (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Using Math vs Using Date Object

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Using Math

Using Date Object

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):