Benchmark: testing loops - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

1
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; ++i) { i; }
2
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { i; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1
2

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 JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark definition is essentially the code that will be executed to test the performance of JavaScript engines. In this case, there are two simple loops defined:

1. The first loop increments a variable `i` from 0 to 999 using `++i`. This is an example of a pre-increment operator.
2. The second loop increments a variable `i` from 0 to 999 using the standard increment operator (`i++`).

**Options Compared**
The two loops are compared, and their performance is measured in terms of executions per second.

Pros and Cons:

* **Pre-increment operator (`++i`)**:
	+ Pros: can be more efficient due to compiler optimizations.
	+ Cons: may have different behavior on certain platforms or browsers.
* **Standard increment operator (`i++`)**:
	+ Pros: widely supported, well-documented, and easy to understand.
	+ Cons: might not be optimized as much by the compiler.

**Library and Purpose**
There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided JSON. However, it's likely that the benchmark uses a generic JavaScript engine or a V8-like engine that doesn't require any external libraries for basic operations like loops.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**
There are no special JS features or syntax mentioned in the provided code snippets. The loops only use basic arithmetic and assignment operators.

**Other Alternatives**
If you want to create similar benchmarks, here are some alternatives:

1. Use a different loop pattern, such as `while` loops, recursive functions, or array methods like `forEach()`.
2. Test more complex operations, like parsing JSON data, executing regular expressions, or manipulating DOM elements.
3. Compare the performance of different JavaScript engines, such as Node.js, V8 (Chrome), SpiderMonkey (Firefox), or Edge.

Keep in mind that these alternatives will require additional modifications to the benchmark definition and script preparation code.

For more information on how to create benchmarks using MeasureThat.net, refer to their documentation and tutorials.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/54.0.2840.99 Safari/537.36 OPR/41.0.2353.69

Browser/OS: Opera 41 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
1	1766576.1 Ops/sec
2	1759215.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

testing loops (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 1 vs 2

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

1

2

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):