console.log("blah");
console.log("blah2");
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
blah2323gd | |
blah22323 |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
blah2323gd | 890870.2 Ops/sec |
blah22323 | 842614.5 Ops/sec |
Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.
What is being tested?
MeasureThat.net is designed to measure the performance of JavaScript code across different browsers, devices, and operating systems. The provided JSON data represents a single benchmark with two test cases.
The primary focus of this benchmark is to compare the performance of simple JavaScript code that outputs "blah" using console.log()
in two slightly different variations: console.log("blah")
and console.log("blah2")
.
Options compared
In this case, only one option is being compared:
"console.log("blah");"
, assigns a value to the variable "blah" before logging it."console.log("blah2");"
, does not assign a value to any variable and directly logs "blah2".Pros and cons of each approach
In general, if performance is a top priority and the output doesn't require caching or reuse, the no-assignment approach might be preferable. However, if there are specific use cases that benefit from variable assignment, the assigned approach might be more suitable.
Library usage
There is no library being used in this benchmark. The code snippets provided are standalone JavaScript examples.
Special JS features or syntax
None of the test cases utilize any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond basic console.log()
functionality.
Other alternatives
If you'd like to compare other approaches, here are some additional options that might be interesting:
console.error()
, alert()
)Keep in mind that these alternatives might require additional setup, modifications to the benchmark script, or the use of specialized libraries.