Benchmark: + vs tenary - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

+
["a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b"].forEach(el => +(el === "a"));
tenary
["a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b", "a", "b"].forEach(el => el === "a" ? 1 : 0);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
+
tenary

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case on MeasureThat.net, which allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. We'll focus on explaining what is tested, comparing options, and discussing pros and cons.

**What is tested?**

In this specific test case, we have two individual test cases:

1. `"+"`: This test checks the performance of the unary plus operator (`+`) in a loop.
2. "tenary": This test checks the performance of a ternary conditional expression (also known as the "ternary operator") in a loop.

**Options compared**

The options being compared are the following:

* Unary Plus Operator (`+`): The code `+(el === "a")` is used to evaluate whether `el` is equal to `"a"`.
* Ternary Conditional Expression (Tenary Operator): The code `el === "a" ? 1 : 0;` is used to evaluate the same condition as above, but using a ternary operator.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Unary Plus Operator (`+`)**:
	+ Pros: Simple, straightforward, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: Can be slower due to the overhead of the unary plus operator.
* **Ternary Conditional Expression (Tenary Operator)**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster in some cases, as it avoids the overhead of a separate comparison operation.
	+ Cons: Requires a semicolon at the end, which can lead to issues with code indentation and formatting.

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided JSON. However, it's worth noting that MeasureThat.net uses its own internal implementation for running JavaScript benchmarks, which may include optimizations or features specific to that platform.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark test case. The code is straightforward and relies solely on the basic arithmetic operators.

Now, let's talk about other alternatives:

* **Alternative 1:** Using a different comparison operator, such as `==` or `===`, instead of the unary plus operator.
	+ Pros: Can be faster due to the absence of overhead.
	+ Cons: May not be as widely supported across all browsers and platforms.
* **Alternative 2:** Using a different ternary operator syntax, such as `if (el === "a") { return 1; } else { return 0; }`.
	+ Pros: Can be more readable and maintainable for some developers.
	+ Cons: May incur additional overhead due to the use of an `if` statement.

Keep in mind that these alternatives are not necessarily relevant to this specific benchmark test case, but they can provide valuable insights into different optimization strategies and trade-offs.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/79.0.3945.94 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 79 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
+	73450888.0 Ops/sec
tenary	73227544.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

+ vs tenary (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: + vs tenary

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

+

tenary

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):