Benchmark: test array check

Script Preparation code:

var array1 = [];
var array2 = ["one","two"];

Tests:

empty
function test(tmp){ if(tmp) { return 1; } } console.log(test(array1));
full
function test(tmp){ if(tmp) { return 1; } } console.log(test(array2));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
empty
full

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 dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined by two script preparation codes:

1. `var array1 = [];` - This creates an empty JavaScript array, which is used as a test input for the first test case.
2. `var array2 = ["one", "two"];` - This creates an array with two string elements, which is used as a test input for the second test case.

**Benchmark Options**

Two options are being compared in this benchmark:

1. **Empty Array**: The first test case uses an empty array (`array1`) as the test input.
2. **Non-Empty Array**: The second test case uses a non-empty array (`array2`) with two string elements as the test input.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Empty Array**:
	+ Pros: Simple to create, easy to compare with an empty result (e.g., `if (tmp) return 1;`).
	+ Cons: May not accurately reflect real-world scenarios where arrays are often populated with data.
* **Non-Empty Array**:
	+ Pros: More representative of real-world usage, especially when dealing with complex data structures or operations that rely on array length.
	+ Cons: Requires more setup and may be slower to create due to the additional elements.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark uses JavaScript as the programming language, which is a significant factor in determining the results. The use of `console.log` statements for output also implies that the benchmark is focused on measuring execution time rather than code complexity or other aspects.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There are no libraries mentioned in this benchmark definition or test cases. However, JavaScript features like `var` declarations, array literals (`[]`), and the `if` statement are being used.

**Special JS Features (Not Applicable)**

None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features that would affect the results.

**Alternatives**

MeasureThat.net is a unique platform for benchmarking JavaScript microbenchmarks. Some alternatives for software engineers who want to perform similar experiments include:

* Node.js Performance Testing: A built-in tool for testing Node.js applications.
* Benchmarking libraries like `benchmark` or `fast-bench`, which provide tools for writing and running performance tests in various programming languages, including JavaScript.
* Online platforms like jsperf or Google's Chrome DevTools Perf Benchmarks, which offer similar functionality to MeasureThat.net.

Keep in mind that each platform has its own strengths and limitations, and the choice of tool may depend on specific use cases, expertise, and requirements.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2025 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/59.0.3071.86 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 59 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
empty	50786.7 Ops/sec
full	50624.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test array check (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: empty vs full

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

empty

full

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):