Benchmark: mybenchmark1233131311

Script Preparation code:

var numberArray1000 = Array.from({ length: 1000 }, (_, index) => index + 1);
var userText1000 = numberArray1000.join("\n");
var numberArray10000 = Array.from({ length: 10000 }, (_, index) => index + 1);
var userText10000 = numberArray10000.join("\n");
var userText = "";

Tests:

normal
var userArray = userText.length === 0 ? [] : userText.split("\n");
filter
var userArray = userText.split("\n").filter(i => i);
normal1000
var userArray1000 = userText1000.length === 0 ? [] : userText1000.split("\n");
filter1000
var userArray1000 = userText1000.split("\n").filter(i => i);
normal10000
var userArray10000 = userText10000.length === 0 ? [] : userText10000.split("\n");
filter10000
var userArray10000 = userText10000.split("\n").filter(i => i);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
normal
filter
normal1000
filter1000
normal10000
filter10000

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'm ready to break down the Benchmark Definition and test cases for MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JavaScript script that prepares data for testing. It creates two types of arrays: `userText` with newline characters (`\n`) separating elements, and `numberArray` with integers from 1 to 1000 and 10,000 respectively. The `Script Preparation Code` section contains the code that creates these arrays.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares different approaches for splitting the `userText` array:

1. **normal**: Simply checks if the length of `userText` is zero and splits it into an array using the newline character (`\n`) as a separator.
2. **filter**: Uses the `Array.prototype.filter()` method to remove empty strings from the split array.

These two approaches have different performance characteristics:

* `normal`: This approach is likely faster because it uses a simple string splitting operation, which is optimized by JavaScript engines.
* `filter`: This approach is slower because it iterates over each element in the array and checks if it's not an empty string. This can lead to more overhead due to the filtering operation.

**Pros and Cons**

* **normal**:
	+ Pros: Simple and lightweight, likely faster.
	+ Cons: May produce garbage collection pauses if the split array contains a large number of elements.
* **filter**:
	+ Pros: More robust, removes empty strings that might be present in the original data.
	+ Cons: Slower due to the filtering operation.

**Library:**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the Benchmark Definition. However, `Array.prototype.filter()` is a built-in JavaScript method that uses the V8 engine's internal filtering algorithm.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**

None of the test cases use special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard `filter()` method and string manipulation.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to optimize these benchmarks further, you could consider:

* Using a more efficient string splitting approach, such as using a regular expression.
* Applying lazy evaluation techniques, like memoization, to reduce the number of iterations over the filter array.
* Optimizing for specific browsers or devices by adjusting the benchmarking code.

Keep in mind that these optimizations would require significant changes to the Benchmark Definition and might not yield noticeable performance improvements.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/119.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 119 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
normal	14847868.0 Ops/sec
filter	8902702.0 Ops/sec
normal1000	27041.5 Ops/sec
filter1000	23460.1 Ops/sec
normal10000	2865.0 Ops/sec
filter10000	2218.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

mybenchmark1233131311 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: normal vs filter vs normal1000 vs filter1000 vs normal10000 vs filter10000

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

normal

filter

normal1000

filter1000

normal10000

filter10000

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):