Benchmark: if ...// if compressed

Script Preparation code:

var a=1,b=4,c=7,x,y;

Tests:

if compressed... with x=a
x=a; if(x<5){ if(x<3)y=(x===1)?1:2; else y=(x===3)?3:4; } else{ if(x<7)y=(x===5)?5:6; else y=(x===7)?7:8; }
if compressed... with x=b
x=b; if(x<5){ if(x<3)y=(x===1)?1:2; else y=(x===3)?3:4; } else{ if(x<7)y=(x===5)?5:6; else y=(x===7)?7:8; }
if compressed... with x=c
x=c; if(x<5){ if(x<3)y=(x===1)?1:2; else y=(x===3)?3:4; } else{ if(x<7)y=(x===5)?5:6; else y=(x===7)?7:8; }
if compressed without ?:... with x=a
x=a; if(x<5){ if(x<3){ if(x===1)y=1; else y=2; } else { if(x===3)y=3; else y=4; } } else{ if(x<7){ if(x===5)y=5; else y=6; } else { if(x===7)y=7; else y=8; } }
if compressed without ?:... with x=b
x=b; if(x<5){ if(x<3){ if(x===1)y=1; else y=2; } else { if(x===3)y=3; else y=4; } } else{ if(x<7){ if(x===5)y=5; else y=6; } else { if(x===7)y=7; else y=8; } }
if compressed without ?:... with x=c
x=c; if(x<5){ if(x<3){ if(x===1)y=1; else y=2; } else { if(x===3)y=3; else y=4; } } else{ if(x<7){ if(x===5)y=5; else y=6; } else { if(x===7)y=7; else y=8; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
if compressed... with x=a
if compressed... with x=b
if compressed... with x=c
if compressed without ?:... with x=a
if compressed without ?:... with x=b
if compressed without ?:... with x=c

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 on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares different approaches to optimizing if-else statements in JavaScript. The test cases are identical, except for the use of conditional operator (`?:`) and the values assigned to variables `a`, `b`, and `c`. The goal is to determine which approach provides better performance.

**Options Compared**

There are four main options compared:

1. **Compressed if-else without conditional operator**: This option uses a traditional if-else statement with nested if statements.
2. **Compressed if-else with conditional operator**: This option uses the conditional operator (`?:`) to simplify the if-else logic.
3. **Uncompressed if-else without conditional operator**: This option does not use any optimizations, resulting in a straightforward if-else statement.
4. **Uncompressed if-else with conditional operator**: This option also does not use any optimizations.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Compressed if-else without conditional operator**:
	* Pros: Simple to understand, easy to maintain.
	* Cons: May lead to slower performance due to nested if statements.
2. **Compressed if-else with conditional operator**:
	* Pros: More concise code, potentially faster performance due to reduced branching.
	* Cons: Requires understanding of the conditional operator syntax, may be less readable for some developers.
3. **Uncompressed if-else without conditional operator**:
	* Pros: Easy to understand and maintain, good readability.
	* Cons: May lead to slower performance compared to optimized approaches.
4. **Uncompressed if-else with conditional operator**:
	* Pros: Good readability, easy to understand for developers familiar with the conditional operator syntax.
	* Cons: Does not provide any performance benefits over the uncompressed option.

**Benchmark Results**

The latest benchmark results show that the compressed if-else options (both with and without conditional operators) outperform the uncompressed options. However, the difference in execution speed is relatively small, and the choice of optimization approach depends on trade-offs between code readability and performance.

In general, the use of conditional operators can simplify the code and potentially lead to better performance. However, it's essential to consider the context and the specific requirements of your project before applying any optimizations.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/56.0.2906.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 56 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
if compressed... with x=a	1377700.0 Ops/sec
if compressed... with x=b	1374898.9 Ops/sec
if compressed... with x=c	1379900.5 Ops/sec
if compressed without ?:... with x=a	1374137.5 Ops/sec
if compressed without ?:... with x=b	1398841.8 Ops/sec
if compressed without ?:... with x=c	1376690.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

if ...// if compressed (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: if compressed... with x=a vs if compressed... with x=b vs if compressed... with x=c vs if compressed without ?:... with x=a vs if compressed without ?:... with x=b vs if compressed without ?:... with x=c

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

if compressed... with x=a

if compressed... with x=b

if compressed... with x=c

if compressed without ?:... with x=a

if compressed without ?:... with x=b

if compressed without ?:... with x=c

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):