function factorializeRecursive(num) {
if (num < 0)
return -1;
else if (num == 0)
return 1;
else {
return (num * factorializeRecursive(num - 1));
}
}
function factorializeLoop(num) {
var result = num;
if (num === 0 || num === 1)
return 1;
while (num > 1) {
num--;
result *= num;
}
return result;
}
var r = factorializeLoop(20);
var r = factorializeRecursive(20);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Finding factorial using loop | |
Finding factorial using recursion |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Finding factorial using loop | 13974992.0 Ops/sec |
Finding factorial using recursion | 854206.7 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.
Benchmark Definition
The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of two different implementations of the factorial function in JavaScript: an iterative loop-based implementation (factorializeLoop
) and a recursive implementation (factorializeRecursive
).
Options Compared
Two options are compared:
num
with itself until it reaches 1.Pros and Cons of Each Approach
Library/Functionality Used
In this benchmark, the factorializeRecursive
function uses a recursive approach, while factorializeLoop
uses an iterative loop-based approach. Both functions are defined in the provided script preparation code.
Special JS Feature/Syntax
The benchmark does not explicitly mention any special JavaScript features or syntax. However, it's worth noting that recursive functions can be affected by the call stack size limit, which may impact performance on older browsers or environments with limited resources.
Other Alternatives
Some alternative approaches to calculating factorials include:
Math.factorial()
(in some browsers) or third-party libraries (e.g., mathjs) can provide an efficient and convenient way to calculate factorials.Keep in mind that these alternatives may have their own trade-offs in terms of performance, memory usage, and complexity.