Benchmark: Javascript Sort (numbers/strings)

HTML Preparation code:

<script>  
  function number_sort(ary) {
      return ary.sort(function(a, b) {
          return a - b;
      });
  }
  
  function string_sort(ary) {
      return ary.sort(function(a, b) {
          return a.localeCompare(b);
      });
  }

</script>

Script Preparation code:

var numbers = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
  numbers[i] = Math.round(Math.random() * 1000000);
}

var strings = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
  strings[i] = Math.round(Math.random() * 1000000).toString();
}

Tests:

Built-in Sort (numbers)
number_sort(numbers.slice(0));
Built-in Sort (strings)
string_sort(strings.slice(0));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Built-in Sort (numbers)
Built-in Sort (strings)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript benchmark test case on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark measures the performance of two built-in sorting functions in JavaScript: `sort()` for numbers and `localeCompare()` for strings.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code generates two arrays, `numbers` and `strings`, each containing 10,000 random integers or strings between 0 and 1,000,000. These arrays are used as input to the sorting functions being benchmarked.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code defines two JavaScript functions: `number_sort()` and `string_sort()`. These functions use the built-in `sort()` method for numbers and `localeCompare()` method for strings, respectively. The `slice(0)` method is used to create a shallow copy of the input arrays.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **Built-in Sort (numbers)**: This test case measures the performance of the built-in sorting function on the `numbers` array.
2. **Built-in Sort (strings)**: This test case measures the performance of the built-in sorting function on the `strings` array.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Built-in Sort**: The built-in `sort()` method, which is a part of the JavaScript standard library.
2. **Custom Implementation**: A custom implementation of the sorting algorithm (not shown in the code snippet).

**Pros and Cons of Built-in Sort**

* Pros:
	+ Fast execution speed
	+ Robust and reliable
	+ Part of the JavaScript standard library, so widely supported
* Cons:
	+ May not be optimal for specific use cases or data types
	+ Can be slower than custom implementations for certain input sizes or distributions

**Pros and Cons of Custom Implementation**

* Pros:
	+ May be optimized for specific use cases or data types
	+ Can be faster than built-in sort for large input sizes or complex sorting algorithms
* Cons:
	+ Requires additional implementation effort
	+ May not be as robust or reliable as built-in sort

**Library and Purpose**

The `localeCompare()` method is a part of the JavaScript standard library, specifically introduced in ECMAScript 5 (ES5). It compares two strings using their locale-specific collation rules.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark. The code only uses standard JavaScript language constructs and built-in methods.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative sorting algorithms that could be compared in a benchmark include:

1. **Quicksort**
2. **Merge Sort**
3. **Heap Sort**
4. **Radix Sort** (for large datasets or specific data types)
5. **Custom sorting algorithms**, such as insertion sort, bubble sort, or tree-based sorts.

These alternatives could be used to compare their performance against the built-in `sort()` method and custom implementation in a benchmark test case like this one.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:125.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/125.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 125 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Built-in Sort (numbers)	1069.8 Ops/sec
Built-in Sort (strings)	56.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Javascript Sort (numbers/strings) (version: 0)

Port from jsperf(https://jsperf.com/sorting-algorithms/58)

Comparing performance of: Built-in Sort (numbers) vs Built-in Sort (strings)

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Built-in Sort (numbers)

Built-in Sort (strings)

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):