Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
(version: 0)
dfgdfgdgdgdg
Comparing performance of:
dfggdgdgdg vs dfghdfghtgedrfgdgdrtge
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
dfggdgdgdg
let number = 14; let primes = []; let NonPrimes = []; let isPrime; // Hard coded values primes[0]=2; primes[1]=3; for(let p=5; p<=number; p+=2) { isPrime = true; for(let c=1;p/primes[c]>=primes[c]; c++){ if(p % primes[c] === 0) isPrime = false; } if(isPrime === true) primes[primes.length]=p; else{ NonPrimes[NonPrimes.length]= p;} } console.log('primes=',primes); console.log('Non primes=',NonPrimes);
dfghdfghtgedrfgdgdrtge
let number = 14; let primes = []; let NonPrimes = []; let isPrime; // Hard coded values primes[0]=2; primes[1]=3; for(let p=5; p<=number; p+=2) { isPrime = true; for(let c=1;p/primes[c]>=primes[c]; c++){ if(p % primes[c] === 0) isPrime = false; break; } if(isPrime === true) primes[primes.length]=p; else{ NonPrimes[NonPrimes.length]= p;} } console.log('primes=',primes); console.log('Non primes=',NonPrimes);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
dfggdgdgdg
dfghdfghtgedrfgdgdrtge
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
gemma2:9b
, generated one year ago):
This benchmark compares two different approaches to finding prime numbers within a given range (up to 14 in this case). Let's break down the code and the differences: **Test Case 1 ("dfggdgdgdg"):** * **Logic:** This approach iterates through each number from 5 to 14, checking if it's divisible by any previously found prime numbers. If it is, it's considered a non-prime; otherwise, it's prime. * **Loop Optimization:** The inner loop (`for(let c=1;p/primes[c]>=primes[c]; c++)`) iterates until `p / primes[c]` becomes less than or equal to `primes[c]`. This can be inefficient because it might check divisibility by larger prime numbers even when a smaller prime already divides the number. **Test Case 2 ("dfghdfghtgedrfgdgdrtge"):** * **Logic:** Similar to Test Case 1, but with a key difference: * **`break;` Statement:** Inside the inner loop, there's a `break;` statement after checking divisibility. This means that once a prime divisor is found, the inner loop immediately terminates. This optimization prevents unnecessary checks. **Pros and Cons:** * **Test Case 1:** * **Con:** The inner loop might perform redundant calculations. * **Pro:** Simpler to understand conceptually. * **Test Case 2:** * **Pro:** Significantly more efficient due to the `break;` statement. * **Con:** Slightly less intuitive because of the `break;` which alters the loop flow. **Other Alternatives:** 1. **Sieve of Eratosthenes:** A highly efficient algorithm for finding all prime numbers up to a given limit. It works by iteratively marking multiples of each prime as composite (non-prime). 2. **Using Libraries:** JavaScript has libraries like `mathjs` that provide optimized functions for primality testing. Let me know if you have any more questions!
Related benchmarks:
testje
Performance Test: substring vs slice vs split
test dv vs fm real
fjdfjdu34uerh
dfjf2hdshsdrh
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?