Benchmark: splicevsfilter - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var a = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
 a.push(i); 
}

Tests:

splice
var b = a.splice(999, 1);
filter
var c = a.filter(function(_, i) { return i !== 999 })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
splice
filter

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition for measuring the performance of two specific JavaScript operations: `splice` and `filter`. The test aims to compare these two approaches for removing an element from an array.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code generates a large array `a` with 100,000 elements using a simple loop. This ensures that both `splice` and `filter` are executed on the same data structure.

```javascript
var a = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
    a.push(i);
}
```

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code, which means that the benchmark focuses solely on the JavaScript execution environment.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. `splice`:
	* This method removes an element from the array at the specified index (`a.splice(999, 1)`).
	* It has a time complexity of O(n), where n is the length of the array.
2. `filter`:
	* This method creates a new array with all elements that pass the provided test (in this case, excluding the element at index 999).
	* It has an average time complexity of O(n), although it can be optimized to O(log n) using more advanced techniques.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary:

* `splice`:
	+ Pros: Simple, straightforward implementation.
	+ Cons: Time complexity is O(n), making it slower for large arrays.
* `filter`:
	+ Pros: Can be optimized to O(log n), but the original implementation has an average time complexity of O(n).
	+ Cons: More complex implementation than `splice`, with additional overhead.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, some underlying technologies might be used:

* For creating and manipulating arrays, JavaScript's built-in `Array` object is likely used.
* For executing the benchmark code, a virtual machine or engine like V8 (used by Google Chrome) might be employed.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None of the provided code snippets use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what is standard. If it did, it would not be immediately apparent without additional context.

**Alternatives**

For benchmarking similar operations, you can consider the following alternatives:

1. Using a testing framework like Jest or Mocha to write and run multiple tests.
2. Utilizing a library like Benchmark.js, which provides a simple API for running microbenchmarks.
3. Creating a custom test harness using Node.js's built-in `require` function to load and execute benchmark scripts.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might offer more features or flexibility than the MeasureThat.net platform, but they require more expertise and setup effort.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; Trident/7.0; rv:11.0) like Gecko

Browser/OS: IE 11 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
splice	1004183.8 Ops/sec
filter	47236.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

splicevsfilter (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: splice vs filter

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

splice

filter

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):