Benchmark: Клавиатура

Script Preparation code:

var position = 20;
var testString = "А еще можно символы в массиве хранить. Сплайсом вставлять символ и джойнить перед выводом";
var testArray = testString.split ``;
var newChar = "X";

Tests:

Массивы
testArray.splice(position, 0, newChar); let result = testArray.join``;
Строки
let result = testString.substring(0, position) + newChar + testString.substring(position)
Slice
let result = testString.slice(0, position) + newChar + testString.slice(position)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Массивы
Строки
Slice

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 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 is a JSON object that contains information about the test case, including:

* "Script Preparation Code": This code is executed before running the actual benchmark. It initializes variables such as `position` (set to 20), `testString`, and an empty array `testArray`. The script also defines a new character `newChar`.
* "Html Preparation Code": This field is empty, which means no HTML-specific code needs to be prepared.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of three test cases:

1. **Массивы (Arrays)**: This test case measures the execution time of inserting an element at a specific position in an array using `splice()`. The benchmark runs the following script:
```javascript
testArray.splice(position, 0, newChar);
let result = testArray.join``;
```
This test case is likely measuring the overhead of modifying an array by inserting a new element.

2. **Строки (Strings)**: This test case measures the execution time of concatenating two strings using string slicing and interpolation (`+=`). The benchmark runs the following script:
```javascript
let result = testString.substring(0, position) + newChar + testString.substring(position);
```
This test case is likely measuring the overhead of concatenating two strings.

3. **Slice**: This test case measures the execution time of extracting a substring from a string using `slice()`. The benchmark runs the following script:
```javascript
let result = testString.slice(0, position) + newChar + testString.slice(position);
```
This test case is likely measuring the overhead of slicing a string.

**Library and Special JS Features**

In all three test cases, the following libraries are used:

* `Array.prototype.splice()`: This method modifies an array by inserting or removing elements.
* `String.prototype.substring()`: This method extracts a substring from a string.
* `String.prototype.slice()`: This method extracts a portion of a string.

No special JavaScript features or syntax (e.g., async/await, generators) are used in these test cases.

**Pros and Cons**

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

1. **splice()**:
	* Pros: Fast insertion operation for arrays.
	* Cons: Can be slow if the array is large or needs to be resized frequently.
2. **Concatenation (+=)**:
	* Pros: Simple, efficient concatenation method.
	* Cons: Can create temporary strings and affect memory usage.
3. **Slice()**:
	* Pros: Fast substring extraction method.
	* Cons: May incur a performance overhead if the string is very large.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative methods that could be used in these test cases include:

1. `concat()` instead of concatenation using the `+=` operator.
2. Using `Array.prototype.push()` and modifying an existing array.
3. Using a library like Lodash or Underscore.js for string manipulation.

However, these alternatives might not provide meaningful results or are less representative of real-world use cases.

The current benchmark design provides a simple, straightforward way to measure the performance differences between these three methods. However, depending on the specific requirements and use cases, more complex scenarios or alternative approaches might be necessary.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 9; ANE-LX1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/86.0.4240.110 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 86 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Массивы	1333.1 Ops/sec
Строки	235005.7 Ops/sec
Slice	240756.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Клавиатура (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: Массивы vs Строки vs Slice

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Массивы

Строки

Slice

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):