Benchmark: Powers of two - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

for with if
var j = "MSKU947765"; var s = 0; var r = [1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512]; for (var e=0;e<10;e++) { if (e<4) { var c = j.charCodeAt(e)-55; s+=(Math.floor(c/10.2)+c)*r[e]; } else { s+=Number(j.charAt(e))*r[e]; }; }; var d = s % 11 % 10; return d;
2x for
var j = "MSKU947765"; var s = 0; var r = [1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512]; for (var e=0;e<4;e++) { var c = j.charCodeAt(e)-55; s+=(Math.floor(c/10.2)+c)*r[e]; }; for (var f=0;f<6;f++){ s+=Number(j.charAt(e))*r[e]; }; var d = s % 11 % 10; return d;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
for with if
2x for

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is essentially a script that performs some arithmetic operations. In this case, it calculates the result of a string manipulation using the `charCodeAt()` and `charAt()` methods, along with some simple math operations. The script also uses an array to store some values.

**Test Case Options**

There are two test cases:

1. **"for with if"`**: This test case iterates over the first four elements of the array using a traditional `for` loop with an `if` statement inside it.
2. **"2x for"`**: This test case uses two nested `for` loops to iterate over the entire array, but only executes the inner loop up to six iterations.

**Pros and Cons**

* **"for with if"`**:
	+ Pros: Simple and straightforward implementation. Easy to understand and maintain.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the additional overhead of the `if` statement inside the loop.
* **"2x for"`**:
	+ Pros: Can potentially be faster since it avoids the overhead of the `if` statement, but may have more complexity.
	+ Cons: More difficult to understand and maintain, especially for developers without experience with nested loops.

**Library Used**

None are explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, the use of `charCodeAt()` and `charAt()` methods suggests that it's using a version of JavaScript that supports these methods.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There is no apparent special feature or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

* **Array iteration**: The benchmark uses an array to store values, which may impact performance depending on the specific use case.
* **Math operations**: The script performs some simple math operations, which can affect performance.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few:

1. Use a different data structure, such as a `Map` or an object, to store values instead of an array.
2. Optimize the math operations using techniques like caching or memoization.
3. Use a different string manipulation method, such as `slice()` or `substring()`, instead of `charCodeAt()` and `charAt()`.
4. Consider using a JavaScript engine with built-in support for optimized arithmetic operations, such as WebAssembly.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may require significant changes to the benchmark code and may not necessarily lead to performance improvements.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:53.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/53.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 53 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
for with if	3466052.5 Ops/sec
2x for	3559636.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Powers of two (version: 0)

If they should be written in an array or in the loop as we go

Comparing performance of: for with if vs 2x for

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

for with if

2x for

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):