Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Math.floor vs ~~
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Math.floor vs ~~
Created:
9 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Math.floor
Math.floor(Math.random() * 16)
~~
~~(Math.random() * 16)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Math.floor
~~
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 what's being tested in this JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net. **Benchmark Definition JSON** The provided benchmark definition is quite simple, with only two test cases: * `Math.floor` vs `~~` The description field is null, indicating that the benchmark doesn't have a specific use case or purpose beyond comparing performance between two different approaches. **Script Preparation Code and HTML Preparation Code** Both fields are null, which means no script preparation code or HTML preparation code was provided. This suggests that the benchmark is focused solely on the JavaScript engine's behavior, without any additional context or setup. **Individual Test Cases** We have two test cases: 1. `Math.floor(Math.random() * 16)`: This test case is using a simple expression involving `Math.floor`, which returns the largest integer less than or equal to a given number. 2. `~~(Math.random() * 16)`: This test case uses the bitwise NOT operator (`~~`) on the result of a random number generated by `Math.random()`. **What's being tested?** The main question being asked is: Which approach, `Math.floor` or `~~`, performs better in terms of execution speed? **Options Compared** The two options being compared are: * `Math.floor`: A built-in JavaScript function that returns the largest integer less than or equal to a given number. * `~~`: The bitwise NOT operator, which can be used as a unary operation to truncate a number to an integer. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **`Math.floor`**: + Pros: Widely supported by JavaScript engines, easy to read and understand, and well-documented. + Cons: May have slower execution speed compared to the bitwise NOT operator due to its function call overhead. * `~~` (Bitwise NOT Operator): + Pros: Can be faster than `Math.floor` because it's a simple arithmetic operation that doesn't involve a function call. It also has a clear, concise syntax. + Cons: Not as widely supported by JavaScript engines, and may require additional knowledge of bitwise operations to understand. **Library or Special JS Feature Used** In this case, the bitwise NOT operator (`~~`) is used, which is a special feature in some JavaScript environments (e.g., WebKit-based browsers). The `Math.floor` function is a built-in function that doesn't rely on any special features. **Other Considerations** * **Browser Support**: The benchmark is designed to run in modern web browsers, specifically Chrome 116 and Safari 537.36. * **Device Platform**: The test runs on desktop devices with Windows operating systems. **Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches or comparing other benchmarks, some alternatives might include: * Using different JavaScript engines (e.g., SpiderMonkey vs V8) * Comparing performance between different arithmetic operations (e.g., `Math.floor` vs `Number()` vs `~~`) * Investigating the performance of other built-in functions or operators in JavaScript (e.g., `Math.sqrt`, `Math.log10`, etc.) * Running benchmarks on other platforms, such as mobile devices or Linux-based systems.
Related benchmarks:
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() vs Math.floorfaster test
~~ vs Math.Floor 2
remainder or floor
Tilde VS floor
remainder or floor 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?