Benchmark: Recursion vs Nested Loops

Tests:

Nested Loops
function steps(n) { for (let row = 0; row < n; row++) { let stair = ""; for (let column = 0; column < n; column++) { if (column <= row) { stair += "#"; } else { stair += " "; } } console.log(stair); } } steps(4)
Recursion
function steps2(n, row = 0, stair = "") { if (n === row) { return; } if (n === stair.length) { console.log(stair); steps2(n, row + 1); return; } if (stair.length <= row) { stair += "#"; } else { stair += " "; } steps2(n, row, stair); } steps2(4)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Nested Loops
Recursion

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 4 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark "Recursion vs Nested Loops" is designed to compare two different programming approaches for generating a visual representation of steps that form one side of a Christmas tree using JavaScript: nested loops and recursion. The key characteristics of both approaches provide insights into performance and coding style.

### Test Cases Explained

1. **Nested Loops**
    - The nested loops implementation utilizes two `for` loops to achieve the desired output. The outer loop iterates over each row, and the inner loop constructs each line (or stair) by appending either a `#` (for steps) or a space (for empty space).
    - **Pros**:
        - *Simplicity*: This approach is straightforward and easy to understand.
        - *Performance*: Iterative solutions often have better performance due to lower overhead, particularly with large inputs.
    - **Cons**:
        - *Readability*: For deeply nested loops, readability may decrease (though this specific case remains manageable).
        - *Scalability*: As the complexity of what needs to be done increases, nested loops can become cumbersome.

2. **Recursion**
    - The recursive implementation defines a function that calls itself to construct each line of the steps. It checks if it has completed the number of rows, and if not, it constructs the current stair line and calls itself to process the next row.
    - **Pros**:
        - *Elegance*: Recursive solutions can be more elegant and expressive for certain types of problems, particularly those that have a naturally recursive structure (like trees).
        - *State Management*: Recursion internally handles state across calls via function parameters.
    - **Cons**:
        - *Performance*: Recursive calls can introduce more overhead; each function call carries a slight cost, and deep recursion can lead to stack overflow.
        - *Complexity*: Understanding the control flow of recursive functions can be more difficult, especially for those unfamiliar with recursion.

### Benchmark Results
In the tests executed on Chrome 130:
- **Nested Loops** executed approximately 29,407 times per second.
- **Recursion** executed around 27,275 times per second.

From these results, we can infer that the nested loops approach performed better than the recursive implementation in terms of execution speed. This is typical in JavaScript and many languages since iteration is generally more efficient than recursive calls due to the overhead associated with managing function call stacks.

### Considerations
When choosing between these two methods, engineers should consider factors such as:
- **Readability vs Performance**: For smaller data sets or where elegance matters, recursion might be preferred. For larger datasets, nested loops may be better due to performance reasons.
- **Limitations of Recursion**: In JavaScript, the maximum call stack size can be a limitation for deep recursion; thus, it may not be suitable for larger inputs unless tail recursion optimization is utilized (though JavaScript does not natively support tail call optimization in all environments).
- **Maintaining State**: The recursive approach may have advantages when you need to preserve state across multiple recursive calls, while nested loops maintain state through lexical scoping.

### Alternatives
Other alternatives to consider for such tasks include:
- **Functional Programming Techniques**: Using higher-order functions like `.map()`, `.reduce()`, or recursion with functional styles (though this might involve creating additional function scopes).
- **Iterative Approach Using Stack**: You can simulate a recursive approach one can implement a stack manually to manage calls iteratively, which can help avoid stack overflow.
- **Dynamic Programming**: For complex problems where results can be reused, dynamic programming techniques could provide solutions that leverage memoization to enhance performance compared to naive recursion.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Nested Loops	29406.9 Ops/sec
Recursion	27275.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Recursion vs Nested Loops (version: 2)

Will use a function that creates steps(one side of a christmas tree)

Comparing performance of: Nested Loops vs Recursion

Created: 5 days ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Nested Loops

Recursion

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 4 days ago):