Benchmark: Normal Conditon vs Tenary Condition

Tests:

Normal
A = true; B = 'dog'; if (A) { B = cat; }
Tenary
A = true; B = 'dog'; B = A ? 'cat' : false;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Normal
Tenary

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to understand what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition provides two different approaches to assign a value to variable `B`:

1. **Normal Condition**: The code uses an if statement with a conditional expression, where `B` is assigned a value based on the condition.
2. **Tenary Condition**: The code uses a ternary operator (also known as a conditional operator) to assign a value to `B`.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches:

1. **Normal Condition**: This approach involves evaluating the condition, which may incur additional overhead due to branching or comparison instructions.
2. **Tenary Condition**: This approach uses a single instruction to evaluate both conditions and assign a value, potentially reducing overhead.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Normal Condition**:
	* Pros: More readable and maintainable code, as the condition is clearly separated from the assignment.
	* Cons: May incur additional overhead due to branching or comparison instructions.
2. **Tenary Condition**:
	* Pros: Potentially faster execution, as it reduces branching and comparison instructions.
	* Cons: May be less readable, as the conditional logic is combined with the assignment.

**Library Usage**

None of the test cases explicitly use a JavaScript library. However, they do demonstrate basic JavaScript syntax and semantics.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in these benchmarks. The tests focus on comparing simple conditional expressions using `if` statements and ternary operators.

**Other Considerations**

When designing benchmarks like this, it's essential to consider the following factors:

1. **Code readability**: Ensure that the code is easy to understand and maintain.
2. **Reproducibility**: Use consistent naming conventions, variable names, and data structures to ensure reproducible results.
3. **Test coverage**: Include multiple test cases with different inputs, conditions, or optimizations to capture a broader range of scenarios.

**Alternatives**

To improve the benchmark or create new ones, consider the following alternatives:

1. **Use more complex conditionals**: Incorporate nested `if` statements, loops, or conditional expressions to simulate real-world scenarios.
2. **Optimize specific JavaScript features**: Create benchmarks that focus on optimizing specific features, such as function calls, array operations, or string manipulation.
3. **Include platform-specific considerations**: Test the impact of different platforms (e.g., mobile vs. desktop), browsers, or architectures (e.g., x64 vs. ARM) on performance.

By understanding these alternatives and considering the pros and cons of each approach, you can create more comprehensive benchmarks that accurately represent real-world scenarios and provide meaningful insights into JavaScript performance optimization.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/70.0.3538.102 Safari/537.36 OPR/57.0.3098.106

Browser/OS: Opera 57 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Normal	0.0 Ops/sec
Tenary	1204919.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Normal Conditon vs Tenary Condition (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Normal vs Tenary

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Normal

Tenary

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):