Benchmark: Numeric range - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

function a(start, end, step) {
	var out = []
    
    for (var i = start; i < end; i += step) {
    	out.push(i)
    }
  	
  	return out
}

function b(start, end, step) {
	var out = new Array(Math.floor((end - start) / step))
    var i, j
    for (i = start, j = 0; i < end; i += step, ++j) {
    	out[j] = i
    }
  	
  	return out
}

var size = 1e6

Tests:

Push
a(0, size, 1)
Set
b(0, size, 1)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Push
Set

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and its results.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance of JavaScript in creating arrays using two different approaches: `push` and `set`. The script preparation code provides two functions, `a` and `b`, which create an array with a specified range of values.

Function `a` uses a `for` loop to iterate over the range and pushes each value into the output array. This approach is more explicit and easy to understand but may be less efficient due to the overhead of function calls.

Function `b` creates an array using the `new Array()` constructor, which is optimized for performance. It then uses a single `for` loop to fill the array with values. This approach is more concise and potentially faster, but it requires understanding of the array creation syntax.

**Options Compared**

The two options compared are:

1. **Push**: Using the `push` method to add elements to an array. This approach is explicit and easy to understand but may be less efficient due to the overhead of function calls.
2. **Set**: Using the `new Array()` constructor to create an array and then using a single loop to fill it with values.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Push**:
	+ Pros: Easy to understand, explicit code.
	+ Cons: May be less efficient due to function call overhead.
* **Set**:
	+ Pros: More concise, potentially faster.
	+ Cons: Requires understanding of array creation syntax.

**Library Used**

None. The benchmark uses built-in JavaScript features and does not require any external libraries.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The test case uses a special JavaScript feature called the "Array constructor" or "Array literal". This feature allows you to create an empty array using the `new Array()` syntax or by simply listing elements in square brackets (e.g., `[1, 2, 3]`). This is a shorthand way of creating arrays and is used extensively in modern JavaScript.

**Other Considerations**

* **Benchmarking**: The benchmark measures the performance of each approach under different conditions. In this case, the test creates an array with a fixed size (`1e6`) and runs each approach multiple times to get an average execution time.
* **Interpretation**: To interpret the results, you need to consider factors such as the specific JavaScript engine, platform, and hardware being used.

**Alternatives**

There are several alternatives for benchmarking JavaScript performance:

1. **V8 Benchmark Suite**: A collection of benchmarks developed by Google V8 team that provides a comprehensive set of benchmarks for measuring JavaScript performance.
2. **JSPerf**: A popular online tool for benchmarking JavaScript performance, allowing you to compare different approaches and versions.
3. **Benchmark.js**: A lightweight, open-source library for building cross-browser benchmarks.

These alternatives provide more comprehensive and standardized benchmarking solutions, but they may require more setup and configuration than the MeasureThat.net website.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_12_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/70.0.3538.110 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 70 on Mac OS X 10.12.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Push	27.2 Ops/sec
Set	111.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Numeric range (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Push vs Set

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Push

Set

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):