Benchmark: concat, etc - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

push
let myObject = { a: 'a', b: 'b', c: 'c', d: 'd', e: 'e', f: 'f', g: 'g', h: 'h', j: 'j', i: 'i' }; const keys = Object.keys(myObject); let operationCount = 200000; while (operationCount--) { let placeholders = ['?', '?', '?']; for (const k of keys) placeholders.push('?'); const sql = placeholders.join(','); }
counter-join
let myObject = { a: 'a', b: 'b', c: 'c', d: 'd', e: 'e', f: 'f', g: 'g', h: 'h', j: 'j', i: 'i' }; const keys = Object.keys(myObject); let operationCount = 200000; while (operationCount--) { let placeholderCounter = 0; for (const k of keys) placeholderCounter++; const sql = (new Array(placeholderCounter + 3)).fill('?').join('?'); }
counter-repeat
let myObject = { a: 'a', b: 'b', c: 'c', d: 'd', e: 'e', f: 'f', g: 'g', h: 'h', j: 'j', i: 'i' }; const keys = Object.keys(myObject); let operationCount = 200000; while (operationCount--) { let placeholderCounter = 0; for (const k of keys) placeholderCounter++; const sql = '?' + ',?'.repeat(placeholderCounter + 2); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
push
counter-join
counter-repeat

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a platform for comparing the performance of JavaScript libraries and techniques on different browsers and devices. The provided benchmark definition and test cases measure the execution time of various string manipulation operations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition json represents the script that will be executed to generate the benchmark results. It consists of two parts:

1. **Script Preparation Code**: This is an empty field, indicating that no specific code needs to be executed before running the benchmark.
2. **Html Preparation Code**: Also empty, suggesting that no HTML-related code or setup is required.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are three test cases, each with a unique approach to generate and manipulate strings:

1. **Test Name: "push"**
	* Benchmark Definition:
```javascript
let myObject = { a: 'a', b: 'b', c: 'c', d: 'd', e: 'e', f: 'f', g: 'g', h: 'h', j: 'j', i: 'i' };
const keys = Object.keys(myObject);
let operationCount = 200000;

while (operationCount--) {
  let placeholders = ['?', '?', '?'];
  
  for (const k of keys) placeholders.push('?');
  
  const sql = placeholders.join(',');
}
```
This test case uses the `push()` method to add elements to an array, which is then used to generate a string by joining the array elements with commas.

2. **Test Name: "counter-join"**
	* Benchmark Definition:
```javascript
let myObject = { a: 'a', b: 'b', c: 'c', d: 'd', e: 'e', f: 'f', g: 'g', h: 'h', j: 'j', i: 'i' };
const keys = Object.keys(myObject);
let operationCount = 200000;

while (operationCount--) {
  let placeholderCounter = 0;
  
  for (const k of keys) placeholderCounter++;
  
  const sql = new Array(placeholderCounter + 3).fill('?').join('?');
}
```
This test case uses the `counter-join()` method to generate a string by creating an array and filling it with placeholders, then joining them together.

3. **Test Name: "counter-repeat"**
	* Benchmark Definition:
```javascript
let myObject = { a: 'a', b: 'b', c: 'c', d: 'd', e: 'e', f: 'f', g: 'g', h: 'h', j: 'j', i: 'i' };
const keys = Object.keys(myObject);
let operationCount = 200000;

while (operationCount--) {
  let placeholderCounter = 0;
  
  for (const k of keys) placeholderCounter++;
  
  const sql = '?' + ',?'.repeat(placeholderCounter + 2);
}
```
This test case uses the `counter-repeat()` method to generate a string by concatenating placeholders with commas.

**Options Compared**

The three test cases compare different approaches to generating and manipulating strings:

1. **Push**: Uses the `push()` method to add elements to an array.
2. **Counter-Join**: Creates an array and fills it with placeholders, then joins them together using the `join()` method.
3. **Counter-Repeat**: Concatenates placeholders with commas.

**Pros and Cons**

Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages:

1. **Push**:
	* Pros: Simple and efficient for small arrays.
	* Cons: May be slower for large arrays due to repeated push operations.
2. **Counter-Join**:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient for large arrays, as it avoids repeated push operations.
	* Cons: May create an array with a fixed length, which can lead to memory usage issues.
3. **Counter-Repeat**:
	* Pros: Simple and easy to understand, but may be slower due to repeated concatenations.
	* Cons: Can lead to performance issues if the placeholder counter is very large.

**Library and Syntax**

None of the test cases use any specific JavaScript library or syntax beyond what's inherent in the language. However, some modern browsers like Chrome provide additional features that might affect benchmark results, such as just-in-time (JIT) compilation or caching.

**Other Alternatives**

Alternative approaches to generating and manipulating strings could include:

1. Using a `StringBuilder` class or a similar API for more efficient string concatenation.
2. Utilizing native string methods like `concat()` or `repeat()`.
3. Employing regular expressions for pattern matching and replacement.
4. Leveraging a database or a data storage system to optimize queries.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach ultimately depends on the specific use case, performance requirements, and trade-offs between code simplicity and efficiency.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_13_4) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/66.0.3359.139 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 66 on Mac OS X 10.13.4

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
push	9.6 Ops/sec
counter-join	7.0 Ops/sec
counter-repeat	71.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

concat, etc (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: push vs counter-join vs counter-repeat

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

push

counter-join

counter-repeat

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):