Benchmark: Optimization - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var speed = 188;
var from = {
  	speed: speed,
	x: 0,
  	y: 450,
  	body: {
    	velocity: {
        	x: 0,
          	y: 0,
        }
    },
  	currentTile: {
    	tileID: 128,
    }
};

function manageTunnel_A(from, reduceSpeed) {
    var cx = from.x,
        cy = from.y;

    if (cx < 128 && cy > 448 && cy < 480) {
        from.body.velocity.x = reduceSpeed ? 120 * Math.sign(from.body.velocity.x) : speed * Math.sign(from.body.velocity.x);
    } else if (cx > 768 && cy > 448 && cy < 480) {
        from.body.velocity.x = reduceSpeed ? 120 * Math.sign(from.body.velocity.x) : speed * Math.sign(from.body.velocity.x);
    }

    if (from.x < 1) {
        from.x = 32 * 28;
    } else if (from.x > 32 * 28 - 1) {
        from.x = 0;
    }
}

function manageTunnel_B(from, reduceSpeed) {
    var cx = from.x,
        cy = from.y,
        vx = Math.sign(from.body.velocity.x);

    if (cx < 128 && cy > 448 && cy < 480) {
        from.body.velocity.x = reduceSpeed ? 120 * vx : speed * vx;
      	if (cx < 1) {
        	from.x = 32 * 28;
    	}
    } else if (cx > 768 && cy > 448 && cy < 480) {
        from.body.velocity.x = reduceSpeed ? 120 * vx : speed * vx;
      	if (cx > 32 * 28 - 1) {
        	from.x = 0;
    	}
    }
}

function manageTunnel_C(from, reduceSpeed) {
    var cx = from.x,
        cy = from.y;

    if ((cx < 128 || cx > 768) && 480 % cy < 32) {
      	if(reduceSpeed){
          from.speed = 120;
        }
    }
}

Tests:

manageTunnel_A
manageTunnel_A(from, true);
manageTunnel_B
manageTunnel_B(from, true);
manageTunnel_C
manageTunnel_C(from, true);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
manageTunnel_A
manageTunnel_B
manageTunnel_C

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark measures the performance of three different implementations of a tunnel management function in JavaScript, specifically for reducing speed when an object enters or exits a certain region.

**Test Cases and Options Compared**

There are three test cases:

1. `manageTunnel_A`
2. `manageTunnel_B`
3. `manageTunnel_C`

Each test case uses the same input data (the `from` object) but with different implementation options for reducing speed.

The main differences between the implementations are:

* In `manageTunnel_A`, the speed is reduced by a fixed amount (`120`) or scaled linearly based on the original speed.
* In `manageTunnel_B`, the speed is reduced by a fixed amount (`120`) or scaled proportionally to the original speed, but with an additional check for object position within a certain range.
* In `manageTunnel_C`, the speed is reduced when entering or exiting a specific region (128-768 x 448-480) and is set to a fixed value (`120`).

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **manageTunnel_A**
	* Pros: Simple, easy to understand, and maintain.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient as other approaches, especially for large datasets or high-speed applications.
2. **manageTunnel_B**
	* Pros: Provides a good balance between simplicity and performance, with the added benefit of object position checks.
	* Cons: The additional check can introduce unnecessary overhead for certain scenarios.
3. **manageTunnel_C**
	* Pros: Can provide better performance by reducing speed only when entering or exiting specific regions, but may be more complex to understand and maintain.
	* Cons: May require more computational resources, especially if the region is large.

**Libraries Used**

None are explicitly mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. However, it's likely that a JavaScript engine (e.g., V8) or a browser implementation (e.g., Chrome) uses various libraries and frameworks to execute the JavaScript code.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The benchmark defines a custom function `manageTunnel_C` with a special syntax: `(cx < 128 || cx > 768) && 480 % cy < 32`. This syntax is not part of standard JavaScript, but rather a custom expression used to check for object position within the specific region.

**Other Alternatives**

To improve performance or explore different approaches, developers could consider:

* Using just-in-time (JIT) compilation or caching mechanisms in their JavaScript engine.
* Employing parallel processing techniques to execute multiple iterations of the tunnel management function simultaneously.
* Investigating other optimization strategies, such as loop unrolling, data structure optimizations, or SIMD instructions.

Keep in mind that these alternatives are highly dependent on the specific requirements and constraints of the application.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2025 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/64.0.3282.186 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 64 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
manageTunnel_A	2499036.5 Ops/sec
manageTunnel_B	2534859.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Optimization (version: 6)

Comparing performance of: manageTunnel_A vs manageTunnel_B vs manageTunnel_C

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

manageTunnel_A

manageTunnel_B

manageTunnel_C

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):