Benchmark: fake-binary - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

Conversion
function fakeBin(strNums) { return strNums.split("") .map(num => num = num < 5 ? 0 : 1) .join("") } console.log(fakeBin("123456789"))
Replacement
function fakeBin2(x) { return x.replace(/\d/g, n => "0000011111"[n]) } console.log(fakeBin2("987654321"))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Conversion
Replacement

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The MeasureThat.net benchmark compares two approaches for editing single character values in a string that only contains numbers:

1. **Conversion**: Using `split()`, `map()`, and `join()` to convert characters.
2. **Replacement**: Using `replace()` with a regular expression to replace characters.

**Options Compared**

Both benchmarks aim to measure the efficiency of these two approaches for editing single character values in a string that only contains numbers. The main difference is in the implementation:

* Conversion: Splits the string into an array, maps each number to either 0 or 1 based on its value, and then joins the resulting array back into a string.
* Replacement: Uses `replace()` with a regular expression to replace each digit (`\d`) with a fixed string ("0000011111").

**Pros and Cons**

* **Conversion**:
	+ Pros: Explicit and clear logic, easy to understand and maintain.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of creating an array and joining it back into a string.
* **Replacement**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster since it avoids the overhead of creating an array and joining it back into a string. It also uses a fixed replacement pattern, which might be optimized by the browser's regex engine.
	+ Cons: May lead to unexpected behavior if the replacement pattern is not correctly specified or if it conflicts with other regex patterns.

**Library Used**

Neither benchmark explicitly uses any libraries beyond JavaScript's built-in functions and the `console.log()` function. However, some browsers may optimize the `replace()` method using a regex engine that is specific to those browsers (e.g., Chrome's regex engine).

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these benchmarks.

**Other Considerations**

When running this benchmark on different devices or browsers, it's essential to consider factors like:

* Browser version and configuration
* Device platform (Desktop, Mobile, etc.)
* Operating System
* Network connectivity and latency

These factors can impact the execution speed of the benchmarks due to differences in JavaScript engine optimization, caching, and memory management.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches or optimizing these benchmarks further, consider:

1. **Regex alternatives**: Investigate whether using different regex patterns or optimizations (e.g., `String.prototype.replace()` with a callback function) can lead to better performance.
2. **Array operations**: Explore other array operations like `forEach()`, `reduce()`, or `filter()` to see if they provide comparable performance to the original benchmarks.
3. **Native JavaScript functions**: Look into native JavaScript functions that might offer better performance for this specific use case, such as `String.prototype.replace()` with a regular expression.

Keep in mind that benchmarking is an iterative process, and exploring different approaches will help you find the most efficient solution for your specific use case.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 121 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Conversion	391939.2 Ops/sec
Replacement	333657.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

fake-binary (version: 0)

Tests the efficiency between using .replace() and .split().map().join() to edit single character values in a string that only contains numbers.

Comparing performance of: Conversion vs Replacement

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Conversion

Replacement

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):