Benchmark: Computation single optimization with destructuring vs application switch with single dep

Script Preparation code:

const data = ["hello", " ", "world"];
let cid = 0;
var dep1 = { id: 0 };
var dep2 = { id: 1 };
var dep3 = { id: 2 };

function sampleArgs1(_0) {
  return _0;
}

function sampleArgs2(_0, _1) {
  return _0 + _1;
}

function sampleArgs3(_0, _1, _2) {
  return _0 + _1 + _2;
}

function sampleDes1(_0) {
  return _0;
}

function sampleDes2([_0, _1]) {
  return _0 + _1;
}

function sampleDes3([_0, _1, _2]) {
  return _0 + _1 + _2;
}

function createApplyComputation(fn, deps, isSingle) {
  return {
    id: cid++,
    fn,
    deps,
    apply: isSingle ? 1 : deps.length
  };
}

function createSingleComputation(fn, deps, isSingle) {
  return {
    id: cid++,
    fn,
    deps,
    isSingle
  };
}

function execApplyComputation(c) {
  switch (c.apply) {
    case 1:
      return c.fn(read(c.deps));
    case 2:
      return c.fn(read(c.deps[0]), read(c.deps[1]));
    default:
      return c.fn(...c.deps.map(read));
  }
}

function execSingleComputation(c) {
  if (c.isSingle) {
    return c.fn(read(c.deps));
  }

  return c.fn(c.deps.map(read));
}

function read(s) {
  return data[s.id];
}

Tests:

apply 1
execApplyComputation(createApplyComputation(sampleArgs1, dep1, true));
single 1
execSingleComputation(createSingleComputation(sampleDes1, dep1, true));
apply 2
execApplyComputation(createApplyComputation(sampleArgs2, [dep1, dep2]));
single 2
execSingleComputation(createSingleComputation(sampleDes2, [dep1, dep2]));
apply 3
execApplyComputation(createApplyComputation(sampleArgs3, [dep1, dep2, dep3]));
single 3
execSingleComputation(createSingleComputation(sampleDes3, [dep1, dep2, dep3]));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
apply 1
single 1
apply 2
single 2
apply 3
single 3

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/85.0.4183.121 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 85 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
apply 1	2293877.5 Ops/sec
single 1	2303678.2 Ops/sec
apply 2	1650983.6 Ops/sec
single 2	1670937.8 Ops/sec
apply 3	1370461.5 Ops/sec
single 3	1597540.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the provided benchmark definition and individual test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches:

1. `execApplyComputation` with `createApplyComputation`
2. `execSingleComputation` with `createSingleComputation`

Both approaches are used to compute a value by calling functions that depend on some input data (`data`, `dep1`, `dep2`, and `dep3`).

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

A) Using `execApplyComputation` with `createApplyComputation`
B) Using `execSingleComputation` with `createSingleComputation`

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

A) `execApplyComputation` with `createApplyComputation`

Pros:

* Can handle arbitrary numbers of dependencies
* Can be more flexible when dealing with complex computations

Cons:

* May lead to slower performance due to the overhead of the `switch` statement
* May require more memory to store the computed values for each dependency

B) `execSingleComputation` with `createSingleComputation`

Pros:

* Typically faster than the first approach due to the reduced number of dependencies and the absence of the `switch` statement
* Requires less memory to store the computed values

Cons:

* Only suitable for simple computations with a fixed number of dependencies
* May become slower if the number of dependencies increases beyond a certain threshold

**Library:**

None mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it is likely that the code uses the `read` function to access data from an array based on the dependency index.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

The `createApplyComputation` and `execApplyComputation` functions use a technique called "tagged template literals" under the hood, which allows them to create functions with dynamic metadata. This is not explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition, but it is an important concept in JavaScript.

**Performance**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between the two approaches by executing each test case multiple times (the exact number is not specified) and measuring the average execution rate per second for each approach.

**Results:**

The results show that the `execSingleComputation` with `createSingleComputation` approach is faster than the `execApplyComputation` with `createApplyComputation` approach in most cases. However, it's essential to note that this may depend on the specific use case and the size of the input data.

It's also worth mentioning that the Chrome 85 browser has a relatively high execution rate per second for all test cases, which suggests that the browser is optimized for performance or that the inputs are particularly well-suited for the computations.

Related benchmarks:

Computation single optimization with destructuring vs application switch with single dep (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: apply 1 vs single 1 vs apply 2 vs single 2 vs apply 3 vs single 3

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

apply 1

single 1

apply 2

single 2

apply 3

single 3

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):