Benchmark: swap test - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

2017 swap
let swap = (a, b) => [b, a]; let inA = 5; let inB = 7; let out = swap(inA, inB);
1824 swap
let inA = 5; let inB = 7; inA ^= inB; inB ^= inA; inA ^= inB;
third arg swap
let inA = 5; let inB = 7; let inC; inC = inA; inA = inB; inB = inC;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
2017 swap
1824 swap
third arg swap

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript benchmarks.

**Benchmarking**

Benchmarking is the process of measuring the performance of a piece of code or a function by running it multiple times and comparing the results. This helps to identify bottlenecks, optimize code for better performance, and compare different implementations of the same algorithm.

**JSON Structure**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition and individual test cases. Here's a breakdown:

* `Benchmark Definition`: A brief description of the benchmark, which in this case is just an empty string (`null`).
* `Script Preparation Code`: An optional code snippet that should be executed before running the benchmark script.
* `Html Preparation Code`: Another optional code snippet that should be executed before rendering the HTML for the benchmark.
* `Individual test cases`: A list of objects, each representing a single test case. Each test case has:
	+ `Benchmark Definition`: The actual JavaScript code being benchmarked.
	+ `Test Name`: A unique identifier for the test case.

**Comparison Options**

The provided benchmarks compare three different approaches to implementing a swap function:

1. **Swap using array destructuring**: The first test case uses the following code: `let swap = (a, b) => [b, a]; let inA = 5; let inB = 7; let out = swap(inA, inB);`. This approach is often considered elegant and concise.
2. **Swap using XOR**: The second test case uses the following code: `let inA = 5; let inB = 7; inA ^= inB; inB ^= inA; inA ^= inB;`. This approach is often considered more efficient, as it avoids creating a temporary array.
3. **Swap using multiple assignments**: The third test case uses the following code: `let inA = 5; let inB = 7; let inC; inC = inA; inA = inB; inB = inC;`. This approach is often considered less efficient due to the extra assignments.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Swap using array destructuring**:
	* Pros: Elegant, concise, easy to understand.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient due to the creation of a temporary array.
2. **Swap using XOR**:
	* Pros: Efficient, often faster than other approaches.
	* Cons: May be less intuitive for some developers.
3. **Swap using multiple assignments**:
	* Pros: None notable.
	* Cons: Less efficient due to extra assignments.

**Library Usage**

There are no libraries explicitly mentioned in the provided benchmark definition or test cases.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanation.

**Alternatives**

For those interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are some common swap algorithms:

* **Dutch National Flag Algorithm**: A variation of the XOR-based approach that eliminates the need for a temporary variable.
* **Cocktail Sort**: A sorting algorithm that can also be used as a simple swap function.
* **Bubble Sort with Swap**: A sorting algorithm that uses a simple swap function to sort arrays.

These alternatives might provide different trade-offs in terms of performance, complexity, and readability.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
2017 swap	1713987584.0 Ops/sec
1824 swap	1710657664.0 Ops/sec
third arg swap	1694635264.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

swap test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 2017 swap vs 1824 swap vs third arg swap

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

2017 swap

1824 swap

third arg swap

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):