Benchmark: systematic vs conditional assignements with explicit condition

Tests:

systematic
let isSomething = false; for(let i = 0; i < 10; i++) { isSomething = true; }
conditional
let isSomething = false; for(let i = 0; i < 10; i++) { if (isSomething === false) isSomething = true; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
systematic
conditional

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/114.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 114 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
systematic	218786656.0 Ops/sec
conditional	156172288.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided JSON benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing two different approaches to assign values to variables in JavaScript: systematic assignment and conditional assignment with explicit condition.

**Systematic Assignment**

In systematic assignment, the value of a variable is assigned unconditionally within a loop. In this case, the test case consists of a single line that assigns `true` to the variable `isSomething`. The loop iterates 10 times, but it doesn't change the value of `isSomething`.

**Conditional Assignment**

In conditional assignment, the value of a variable is assigned only if a certain condition is met. In this test case, the value of `isSomething` is assigned to `true` only if its current value is `false`. The loop iterates 10 times, and on each iteration, the condition is checked.

**Options compared**

The two approaches are being compared in terms of performance. The systematic approach assigns a fixed value without any conditional checks, while the conditional approach checks a condition before assigning a value.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Systematic Assignment**
	+ Pros:
		- Faster execution time since there's no overhead from conditional checks.
		- More predictable behavior.
	+ Cons:
		- May not be as efficient if the loop iterates many times, wasting cycles.
		- Less flexible than conditional assignments.
* **Conditional Assignment**
	+ Pros:
		- Can take advantage of the fact that some conditions may always be true or false, reducing unnecessary checks.
		- More flexible and can handle different conditions.
	+ Cons:
		- Slower execution time due to the overhead from conditional checks.
		- May introduce unpredictable behavior if the condition is not met.

**Library/ Library purpose**

There doesn't seem to be any explicit library mentioned in this benchmark. However, it's likely that a standard JavaScript engine or browser is being used, which implements various optimizations and libraries under the hood.

**Special JS feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. The code uses basic JavaScript syntax and doesn't exploit any advanced features like async/await, promises, or ES6+ syntax.

**Other Alternatives:**

To test similar benchmarks, you could explore different scenarios:

1. Test assignment operations with other data types (e.g., numbers, strings, objects).
2. Examine the impact of different loop iteration patterns (e.g., nested loops, recursive functions).
3. Investigate the effect of using `const` or `let` declarations on variable assignments.
4. Compare performance between different JavaScript engines (e.g., V8, SpiderMonkey) or browsers.

These alternatives can help you better understand the nuances of JavaScript assignment operations and optimize your code for specific use cases.

Related benchmarks:

systematic vs conditional assignements with explicit condition (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: systematic vs conditional

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

systematic

conditional

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):