Benchmark: UUID Generator - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

With web crypto
function getUUID() { return ([1e7] + -1e3 + -4e3 + -8e3 + -1e11).replace(/[018]/g, (c) => (c ^ (crypto.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(1))[0] & (15 >> (c / 4)))).toString(16), ); } getUUID()
Math.random
function getUUID() { return 'xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx'.replace(/[xy]/g, function(c) { var r = Math.random() * 16 | 0, v = c == 'x' ? r : (r & 0x3 | 0x8); return v.toString(16); }); } getUUID()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
With web crypto
Math.random

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. In this case, we have two benchmark definitions: one using the `crypto` module (with web crypto) and another using `Math.random`. We'll analyze these two approaches, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definitions**

The provided JSON contains two benchmark definitions:

1. **With web crypto**: This definition uses the `crypto.getRandomValues()` method to generate random numbers for generating UUIDs.
```javascript
function getUUID() {
  return ([1e7] + -1e3 + -4e3 + -8e3 + -1e11).replace(/[018]/g, (c) => 
    (c ^ (crypto.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(1))[0] & (15 >> (c / 4)))).toString(16),
  );
}
```
2. **Math.random**: This definition uses the `Math.random()` function to generate random numbers for generating UUIDs.
```javascript
function getUUID() {
  return 'xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx'.replace(/[xy]/g, function(c) {
    var r = Math.random() * 16 | 0, v = c == 'x' ? r : (r & 0x3 | 0x8);
    return v.toString(16);
  });
}
```
**Options Compared**

The two benchmark definitions compare the performance of:

* `crypto.getRandomValues()` vs. `Math.random()`

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief analysis of each approach:

### With web crypto

Pros:

* **Randomness**: This method uses a cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generator (CSPRNG), which is designed to generate unpredictable and uniformly distributed random numbers.
* **Security**: Using `crypto.getRandomValues()` ensures that the generated UUIDs are highly unlikely to be predictable or reproducible.

Cons:

* **Browser support**: Not all browsers support the `crypto` module, so this method may not work in older browsers.
* **Performance overhead**: Generating random numbers using `crypto.getRandomValues()` can incur a small performance overhead compared to `Math.random()`.
* **Library dependency**: This method relies on the `crypto` library, which adds an extra dependency.

### Math.random

Pros:

* **Wide browser support**: `Math.random()` is widely supported across most browsers.
* **Performance**: Generating random numbers using `Math.random()` can be faster than using `crypto.getRandomValues()`.
* **Simplistic implementation**: The code for generating UUIDs using `Math.random()` is relatively simple and straightforward.

Cons:

* **Predictability**: `Math.random()` uses a pseudorandom number generator, which may not generate highly unpredictable numbers.
* **Limited randomness quality**: While better than `Math.random()` alone, this approach still suffers from limited randomness quality compared to the CSPRNG used in `crypto.getRandomValues()`.

**Library and Purpose**

The `crypto` library is a built-in Node.js module that provides cryptographic functions, including random number generation. Its purpose is to provide a secure way to generate unpredictable and uniformly distributed random numbers.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There isn't any special JavaScript feature or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definitions. However, it's worth noting that using `crypto.getRandomValues()` is an example of using a cryptographically secure pseudo-random number generator (CSPRNG).

**Other Alternatives**

If you don't want to use `crypto` or `Math.random()`, you could explore other alternatives for generating random numbers, such as:

* Using a third-party library like `seeds-js` or `random-js`.
* Implementing your own CSPRNG using a hash function and a seed.
* Using the `window.crypto` API in modern browsers (if supported).

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives may have their own trade-offs, pros, and cons.

I hope this explanation helps you understand the JavaScript microbenchmark!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
With web crypto	33754.2 Ops/sec
Math.random	264875.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

UUID Generator (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: With web crypto vs Math.random

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

With web crypto

Math.random

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):