Benchmark: dasdnnnn - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var first = "first"
var second = "second"

Tests:

localCompare
var x = first.localeCompare(second)
manual
var x = first < second ? -1 : first > second ? 1: 0

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
localCompare
manual

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is created using MeasureThat.net, which allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark consists of two test cases: "localCompare" and "manual". Both tests compare the values of two strings, "first" and "second".

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is provided as a string literal:
```javascript
var first = "first";
var second = "second";
```
This code initializes two variables with the specified string values. These variables will be used in the benchmark tests.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code, which means that MeasureThat.net doesn't need to parse or execute any HTML code before running the benchmark.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **"localCompare"`**

This test case uses the `localeCompare()` method to compare the values of "first" and "second". The `localeCompare()` method returns a negative value if the first string comes before the second in a locale-specific comparison, zero if they're equal, and a positive value otherwise.

2. **"manual"`**

This test case uses a manual comparison using the ternary operator (`?:`):
```javascript
var x = first < second ? -1 : first > second ? 1 : 0;
```
If "first" is less than "second", `x` will be assigned `-1`. If they're equal, `x` will be `0`. Otherwise, if "first" is greater than "second", `x` will be assigned `1`.

**Comparison**

The two test cases are compared to determine which method is faster. In this case, the "manual" test wins with 5625169.5 executions per second, while the "localCompare" test loses with 6251981.5 executions per second.

**Pros and Cons**

**"localCompare"`**

Pros:

* More concise code
* Less prone to errors (since it's a built-in method)

Cons:

* May be slower due to the overhead of the `localeCompare()` method
* May not work as expected in certain locales or with certain string encodings

**"manual"`**

Pros:

* Can be faster since it avoids the overhead of the `localeCompare()` method
* More control over the comparison logic (although this can also introduce errors)

Cons:

* Longer code that's more prone to errors
* May require additional processing steps to handle edge cases or exceptions

**Library: `localeCompare()`

The `localeCompare()` method is a built-in JavaScript method that compares two strings according to the locale-specific ordering rules. It's used in many languages and platforms to compare strings.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. Both test cases use standard JavaScript syntax and semantics.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for comparing strings could include:

* Using other comparison methods like `===` (strict equality), `==` (loose equality), or `<=`, `>=`
* Implementing a custom string comparison algorithm
* Using a different library or framework that provides string comparison functionality

Keep in mind that the choice of comparison method depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/14.1.2 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 14 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
localCompare	5625169.5 Ops/sec
manual	6251981.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

dasdnnnn (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: localCompare vs manual

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

localCompare

manual

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):