Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
New Variable of Result of Mutating Method vs. Same Variable
(version: 0)
Tests how inefficient it is to save the result of a mutating method (that already changes the value passed to it) in a new variable.
Comparing performance of:
Control Case (not creating a new variable) vs Save Result in New Variable
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var array = ["he", "ll", "o", " w", "or", "ld", "!"];
Tests:
Control Case (not creating a new variable)
array.reverse();
Save Result in New Variable
const reverse = array.reverse();
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Control Case (not creating a new variable)
Save Result in New Variable
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to understand what is being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark defines two different approaches: 1. **"Control Case (not creating a new variable)"**: This approach tests the efficiency of reversing an array without storing the result in a new variable. 2. **"Save Result in New Variable"**: This approach tests the efficiency of reversing an array and storing the result in a new constant variable. **What is being tested?** The benchmark is testing the performance difference between these two approaches: * How much time does it take to reverse an array without creating a new variable? * How much time does it take to reverse an array and store the result in a new variable? **Options compared** In this case, there are only two options being compared: 1. **"Control Case (not creating a new variable)"**: This approach is likely to be the most efficient way to reverse an array, as it avoids the overhead of creating a new variable. 2. **"Save Result in New Variable"**: This approach creates a new variable `reverse` and assigns the result of `array.reverse()` to it. This introduces additional overhead due to variable creation and assignment. **Pros and Cons** * **"Control Case (not creating a new variable)"** + Pros: - Less overhead due to variable creation - May be faster in terms of execution time + Cons: - More memory-intensive, as the original array is not modified * **"Save Result in New Variable"** + Pros: - Allows for more flexibility and reusability of the reversed array + Cons: - Introduces additional overhead due to variable creation and assignment **Library usage** There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's likely that the `Array.prototype.reverse()` method is being used, which is a built-in method of the Array prototype. **Special JS features or syntax** None are explicitly mentioned, but it's worth noting that the use of `const` to declare variables may be relevant to some JavaScript versions or implementations. However, the specific behavior of `const` in this context is not being tested. **Other alternatives** In general, there may be other approaches to reversing an array that could be tested, such as: * Using a custom implementation without modifying the original array * Using a different data structure, like a linked list or a stack, to reverse the array * Using parallel processing or concurrency to improve performance However, these alternatives are not explicitly mentioned in the provided benchmark definition.
Related benchmarks:
Arrays: spread operator vs push
Spread vs Push when copying array
Array push vs spread operator 2
Array.slice() vs. Spread operator
Array.slice() vs. Spread operator (10000 items)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?