Benchmark: Split into whole words

Script Preparation code:

var
  input = 'There was no possibility of taking a walk that day. We had been wandering, indeed, in the leafless shrubbery an hour in the morning; but since dinner (Mrs. Reed, when there was no company, dined early) the cold winter wind had brought with it clouds so sombre, and a rain so';

Tests:

my answer
function splitText(text, maxLength = 30) { const result = []; while (text !== '') { let endIndex; if (maxLength > text.length) { // [A] endIndex = text.length; } else if (text.substring(maxLength, 1) !== ' ') { // [B} endIndex = text.lastIndexOf(' ', maxLength); } else { endIndex = maxLength; } result.push(text.substring(0, endIndex)); text = text.substr(endIndex).trim(); } return result; } console.log(splitText(input));
my answer non-destructive
function splitText(text, maxLength = 30) { const result = [], ubound = text.length; let currentPos = 0; debugger; while (currentPos < ubound) { let endIndex = currentPos + maxLength; if (endIndex > ubound) { // [A] endIndex = text.length; } else if (text.substring(endIndex, 1) !== ' ') { // [B} endIndex = text.lastIndexOf(' ', endIndex) + 1; } result.push(text.substring(currentPos, endIndex).trim()); currentPos = endIndex; } return result; } console.log(splitText(input));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
my answer
my answer non-destructive

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_12_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/62.0.3202.89 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 62 on Mac OS X 10.12.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
my answer	51709.8 Ops/sec
my answer non-destructive	52743.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of JavaScript code that splits a given text string into an array of words, with a maximum length limit (defaulting to 30 characters).

**Script Preparation Code:**

The script preparation code provides the input text for the benchmark:
```javascript
var input = 'There was no possibility of taking a walk that day. We had been wandering, indeed, in the leafless shrubbery an hour in the morning; but since dinner (Mrs. Reed, when there was no company, dined early) the cold winter wind had brought with it clouds so sombre, and a rain so';
```
This input text is a long sentence that will be split into words.

**Html Preparation Code:**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that the benchmark does not require any additional HTML setup or parsing.

**Test Cases:**

There are two test cases:

1. **"my answer"**: This test case uses the traditional approach to splitting the text string into words. The `splitText` function iterates through the input text and pushes each word into the `result` array using the `substring` method.
2. **"my answer non-destructive"**: This test case uses a slightly different approach, where the `splitText` function also modifies the original input string by assigning it to the `text` variable.

**Libraries:**

None of the test cases use any external libraries or frameworks.

**Special JavaScript Features/Syntax:**

* The `trim()` method is used in both test cases to remove whitespace from the ends of each word.
* The `substring()` method is used to extract substrings from the input text.
* The `while` loop is used to iterate through the input text and push words into the `result` array.

**Pros and Cons of Approaches:**

1. **Traditional Approach ( "my answer" )**:
	* Pros:
		+ Simple and straightforward implementation.
		+ Easy to understand and maintain.
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower due to unnecessary string manipulations.
		+ Can lead to performance issues with large input strings.
2. **Non-Destructive Approach ( "my answer non-destructive" )**:
	* Pros:
		+ Preserves the original input string, which can reduce memory usage.
		+ May be faster due to reduced string manipulation.
	* Cons:
		+ More complex implementation.
		+ May require additional memory allocations.

**Other Considerations:**

* The benchmark measures the performance of the JavaScript code in terms of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond) on a specific device and browser configuration.
* The `RawUAString` field provides information about the user agent string, which can be used to identify the browser and device being used.

**Alternatives:**

Some alternative approaches for splitting text strings into words include:

* Using the `split()` method, which is supported by most modern browsers.
* Using a library like `lodash` or `underscore`, which provide optimized string manipulation functions.
* Using a more efficient algorithm, such as a sliding window approach.

However, these alternatives are not represented in the provided benchmark test cases.

Related benchmarks:

Split into whole words (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: my answer vs my answer non-destructive

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

my answer

my answer non-destructive

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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