Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Math.floor x tilde
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
FastFloor vs Math.floor
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
FastFloor
var data = 123456.12121442142; return ~~(data * 1)/1;
Math.floor
var data = 123456.12121442142; Math.floor(data);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
FastFloor
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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net. The provided JSON represents two benchmark test cases, each designed to measure the performance difference between two approaches: the bitwise NOT operator (~) and the Math.floor function. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is a simple JavaScript statement that performs a specific operation: * `var data = 123456.12121442142;` initializes a variable `data` with a large floating-point number. * `return ~~(data * 1)/1;` applies the bitwise NOT operator (~) to the result of multiplying `data` by 1, effectively performing integer truncation. The `/1` at the end ensures that the result is an integer. * `var data = 123456.12121442142; Math.floor(data);` simply uses the built-in `Math.floor` function to truncate the floating-point number. **Options Compared** The two approaches being compared are: 1. **Bitwise NOT operator (~)**: This approach uses the bitwise NOT operator, which is a binary operation that flips all bits of its operand. 2. **Math.floor**: This approach relies on the built-in `Math.floor` function, which returns the largest integer less than or equal to the given number. **Pros and Cons** * **Bitwise NOT operator (~)**: + Pros: Simple, lightweight, and fast. The bitwise NOT operator is a native operation in JavaScript, so it doesn't incur any overhead. + Cons: Can be tricky to read and understand, as it's not immediately clear what the operator does. Additionally, this approach may not work correctly for non-integer values (e.g., NaN or Infinity). * **Math.floor**: + Pros: More readable and maintainable than the bitwise NOT operator. The `Math.floor` function is well-documented and widely understood. + Cons: Slightly slower due to the overhead of calling a built-in function. **Other Considerations** In addition to these two approaches, it's worth noting that there may be other ways to achieve integer truncation in JavaScript, such as using the `|0` trick or bitwise shift operators. However, these alternatives are less common and may not be as straightforward to understand. **Library/Function Used** Neither of these benchmark test cases uses any external libraries or functions beyond the standard library provided by JavaScript (e.g., Math.floor). **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in either benchmark definition. Both tests rely on standard JavaScript syntax and semantics. **Other Alternatives** For integer truncation, other alternatives to the bitwise NOT operator include: * `|0` trick: `x | 0` * Bitwise shift operators: + `x >> 0` (right shift) + `x << 0` (left shift) However, these alternatives may not be as fast or efficient as the bitwise NOT operator in all cases. Overall, the benchmark test cases provide a simple and straightforward way to compare the performance of two approaches: the bitwise NOT operator and the Math.floor function.
Related benchmarks:
fast floor vs floor js
fast floor vs floor js vs unsafe floor
Flooring with different Bitwise operators Fixed
Tilde VS floor
number floor format1
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?