Benchmark: custom randomize vs shuffle concat

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="
https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js
"></script>

Tests:

shuffle with unwanted check
const defaultOptions = [ { icon: "icon1", name: "name1", value: "value1" }, { icon: "icon2", name: "name2", value: "value3" }, { icon: "icon3", name: "name3", value: "value3" }, { icon: "icon4", name: "name4", value: "value4" }, { icon: "icon5", name: "name5", value: "value5" }, { icon: "icon6", name: "name6", value: "value6" } ]; const randomizeRadioOptions = (options, wantedAsLastElement) => { const optionsArray = _.shuffle(options); const lastElement = optionsArray.find(x => x.value === wantedAsLastElement); _.remove(optionsArray, x => x.value === wantedAsLastElement); optionsArray.push(lastElement); return optionsArray; }; const newOptions = randomizeRadioOptions(defaultOptions, "value6");
simple concat
const defaultOptions = [ { icon: "icon1", name: "name1", value: "value1" }, { icon: "icon2", name: "name2", value: "value3" }, { icon: "icon3", name: "name3", value: "value3" }, { icon: "icon4", name: "name4", value: "value4" }, { icon: "icon5", name: "name5", value: "value5" }, ] const indecisiveOption = { icon: "icon6", name: "name6", value: "value6" } const newOptions = _.shuffle(defaultOptions).concat(indecisiveOption);
shuffle and push
const defaultOptions = [ { icon: "icon1", name: "name1", value: "value1" }, { icon: "icon2", name: "name2", value: "value3" }, { icon: "icon3", name: "name3", value: "value3" }, { icon: "icon4", name: "name4", value: "value4" }, { icon: "icon5", name: "name5", value: "value5" }, ] const indecisiveOption = { icon: "icon6", name: "name6", value: "value6" } const newOptions = _.shuffle(defaultOptions); newOptions.push(indecisiveOption);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
shuffle with unwanted check
simple concat
shuffle and push

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a platform that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks, testing various optimization techniques. The provided benchmark definition json shows three individual test cases: "shuffle with unwanted check", "simple concat", and "shuffle and push". These test cases compare different approaches for rearranging an array of objects.

**Test Case 1: Shuffle with Unwanted Check**

This test case uses the `lodash` library, a popular utility library for JavaScript. The purpose of this library is to provide functions that improve performance by avoiding the creation of intermediate arrays, which can be expensive in terms of memory and computational resources.

The benchmark definition code creates an array of objects (`defaultOptions`) and defines a function (`randomizeRadioOptions`) that shuffles the array using `lodash`'s `shuffle()` function. The shuffled array is then checked to ensure that an unwanted element is at the end of the array (indicated by the variable `wantedAsLastElement`). If this condition is met, the unwanted element is removed from the array and pushed back to its original position.

**Test Case 2: Simple Concat**

This test case also uses the `lodash` library. The benchmark definition code creates an array of objects (`defaultOptions`) and defines a function that shuffles the array using `lodash`'s `shuffle()` function, just like in Test Case 1. However, instead of checking for the unwanted element, this test case simply concatenates the shuffled array with another object (`indecisiveOption`) without any additional checks.

**Test Case 3: Shuffle and Push**

This test case does not use any external libraries. The benchmark definition code creates an array of objects (`defaultOptions`) and defines a function that shuffles the array using a simple algorithm (similar to Test Case 1). However, instead of checking for the unwanted element, this test case simply pushes another object (`indecisiveOption`) onto the end of the shuffled array.

**Comparison and Analysis**

The three test cases compare different approaches for rearranging an array of objects:

*   **Test Case 1: Shuffle with Unwanted Check**
    *   Pros: The `lodash` library is used, which can improve performance by avoiding intermediate arrays. Additionally, this approach ensures that the unwanted element is in its correct position.
    *   Cons: This approach requires extra checks to ensure that the unwanted element is at the end of the array.
*   **Test Case 2: Simple Concat**
    *   Pros: This approach does not require any additional checks or library calls, making it simpler and faster.
    *   Cons: The `lodash` library is not used, which may lead to performance issues with larger arrays. Additionally, this approach ensures that the unwanted element will be pushed onto the end of the array without any checks.
*   **Test Case 3: Shuffle and Push**
    *   Pros: This approach does not require any external libraries, making it a lightweight option.
    *   Cons: The simple algorithm used may lead to performance issues with larger arrays.

**Benchmark Results**

The latest benchmark results show that the "shuffle and push" test case has the highest execution rate per second (124.0), followed by the "simple concat" test case (383.34). However, the actual performance difference between these approaches depends on various factors such as array size, JavaScript engine, and hardware.

**Conclusion**

In conclusion, this benchmark highlights the importance of considering performance optimization techniques when working with arrays in JavaScript. The choice of approach depends on the specific use case, including factors such as array size, memory constraints, and desired performance characteristics. By understanding the pros and cons of different approaches, developers can choose the most suitable solution for their specific needs.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/124.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/124.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 124 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
shuffle with unwanted check	3032335.0 Ops/sec
simple concat	3833406.0 Ops/sec
shuffle and push	6236470.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

custom randomize vs shuffle concat (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: shuffle with unwanted check vs simple concat vs shuffle and push

Created: 7 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

shuffle with unwanted check

simple concat

shuffle and push

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):