Benchmark: math operation vs condition

Tests:

math
const CaesarCipher = function (shift) { const code = (str, shift) => str.toUpperCase().replace(/[A-Z]/g, val => String.fromCharCode(65 + (val.charCodeAt() + shift - 65) % 26)); this.encode = str => code(str, shift); this.decode = str => code(str, 26 - shift); }; const c = new CaesarCipher(5); c.encode('Codewars') c.decode('HTIJBFWX')
condition
var CaesarCipher = function (shift) { this.shiftChar = (str, offset) => str.replace(/[a-z]/gi, (c) => { let charCode = c.toUpperCase().charCodeAt(0) + offset; if (charCode < 65) charCode += 26; else if (charCode > 90) charCode -= 26; return String.fromCharCode(charCode); }); this.encode = (str) => this.shiftChar(str, shift); this.decode = (str) => this.shiftChar(str, -shift); }; const c = new CaesarCipher(5); c.encode('Codewars') c.decode('HTIJBFWX')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
math
condition

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**: The benchmark definition defines two test cases: "math operation vs condition" and its corresponding HTML preparation code. However, the actual JavaScript code for these tests is not provided in the JSON data. We'll assume that this code has been defined elsewhere.

**Individual Test Cases**: There are two test cases:

1. **"math "**: This test case appears to be testing a mathematical operation (likely addition or substitution) within a Caesar Cipher encryption algorithm.
	* The `CaesarCipher` function is created with a shift value of 5, which means it will substitute each letter with the corresponding letter 5 positions ahead in the alphabet.
	* The `encode` method applies this shift to a given string, and the `decode` method applies the inverse shift (26 - shift) to another string.
2. **"condition"**: This test case appears to be testing a conditional statement within the Caesar Cipher algorithm.
	* The `shiftChar` function replaces each letter in the input string with its corresponding shifted character based on the offset value (in this case, 5).
	* However, if the character code is less than 65 (the ASCII value of 'A'), it adds 26 to the result. If the character code is greater than 90 (the ASCII value of 'Z'), it subtracts 26 from the result.
	* The `encode` and `decode` methods use this function with different offset values.

**Library**: None, as these are custom implementations of the Caesar Cipher algorithm.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**: There doesn't seem to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being used in these tests. However, the use of Unicode characters (e.g., `\r\n` and ` charCodeAt(0)` ) is consistent with modern JavaScript.

**Other Alternatives**: To test similar mathematical operations, you might consider using a testing framework like Jest or Mocha to write unit tests for your own implementation of the Caesar Cipher algorithm. To test conditional statements, you could use a testing framework that supports mocking functions and variables, such as Jest's `jest.fn()` function.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches:**

1. **Using the `CaesarCipher` class**: This approach allows for encapsulation of the encryption/decryption logic within an object, making it easier to reuse and extend.
	* Pros: Easy to use, flexible, and extensible.
	* Cons: May be less efficient due to object creation overhead.
2. **Using the `shiftChar` function directly**: This approach allows for direct access to the encryption/decryption logic without creating an object.
	* Pros: Efficient, easy to optimize, and doesn't require object creation.
	* Cons: Less flexible and reusable than the first approach.

Ultimately, the choice between these approaches depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/16.5 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 16 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
math	411994.6 Ops/sec
condition	416288.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

math operation vs condition (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: math vs condition

Created: 2 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

math

condition

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):