Benchmark: join vs every - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

join
const quickSort = (arr) => { if (arr.length <= 1) { return arr } const pivot = arr[0] const left = [] const right = [] for (let i=1; i<arr.length; i++) { if (arr[i] < pivot) { left.push(arr[i]) } else { right.push(arr[i]) } } return [...quickSort(left), pivot, ...quickSort(right)] } const isPermutation = (a, b) => { if (a === b) { return true } if (a.length !== b.length) { return false } const sortedA = quickSort(a) const sortedB = quickSort(b) return sortedA.join('') === sortedB.join('') } isPermutation('abc', 'bac')
every
const quickSort = (arr) => { if (arr.length <= 1) { return arr } const pivot = arr[0] const left = [] const right = [] for (let i=1; i<arr.length; i++) { if (arr[i] < pivot) { left.push(arr[i]) } else { right.push(arr[i]) } } return [...quickSort(left), pivot, ...quickSort(right)] } const isPermutation = (a, b) => { if (a === b) { return true } if (a.length !== b.length) { return false } const sortedA = quickSort(a) const sortedB = quickSort(b) return sortedA.every((x, i) => x === sortedB[i]) } isPermutation('abc', 'bac')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
join
every

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

The provided benchmark tests the performance of two approaches to compare two arrays for permutation:

1. **Join**: This approach uses the `join()` method to concatenate the sorted elements of both arrays into strings, and then compares these strings for equality using the `===` operator.
2. **Every**: This approach uses the `every()` method to check if all elements of one array match the corresponding elements in another array.

**Options comparison**

The two approaches have different pros and cons:

* **Join**:
	+ Pros: Simple, easy to implement, and widely supported by most browsers.
	+ Cons: May be slower than other methods due to string concatenation and equality checks.
* **Every**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster than `join` because it avoids string concatenation and uses a more efficient algorithm.
	+ Cons: Requires the use of `every()` method, which may not be supported by all browsers.

**Other considerations**

When choosing between these approaches, consider the following factors:

* **Browser support**: If you need to support older browsers, `join` might be a safer choice.
* **Performance**: If speed is critical, `every` might be a better option.
* **Code readability**: If readability is important, `every` might be preferred because it's more explicit about the comparison logic.

**Library and special JS features**

In this benchmark, there are no libraries or special JavaScript features used. The code only relies on built-in methods like `join()`, `every()`, and `quickSort()` (which is not actually being tested in this example).

**Alternatives**

Other approaches to compare two arrays for permutation include:

* **Using a library**: Consider using a dedicated library like [lodash](https://lodash.com/) or [permutation-checker](https://github.com/selvaes/permutation-checker) which can provide optimized and efficient solutions.
* **Custom implementation**: You could implement your own algorithm to compare arrays, potentially using more advanced techniques like [bitwise operations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitwise_operations_in_JavaScript).

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
join	3131998.2 Ops/sec
every	5341621.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

join vs every (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: join vs every

Created: 4 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

join

every

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):