Benchmark: ceil vs code - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var x = Math.random() * 100000000;
var z = Math.random() * 1000000;
var y;

Tests:

ceil
z = Math.ceil(x/y);
code
z = ((x/y) | 0) + ((x % y) != 0)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ceil
code

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to calculate the ceiling of a division result: `Math.ceil()` and a custom implementation using bitwise operations (`| 0`).

**Options Compared**

The benchmark tests the performance of:

1. `z = Math.ceil(x/y);`: This uses the built-in `Math.ceil()` function from JavaScript's Math object.
2. `z = ((x/y) | 0) + ((x % y) != 0);`: This custom implementation takes advantage of bitwise operations to approximate the ceiling of a division result.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Math.ceil()**:
	* Pros: Easy to read, maintainable, and widely supported.
	* Cons: May be slower than the custom implementation due to the overhead of function calls.
2. **Custom Implementation (`| 0`)**:
	* Pros: Can be faster since it avoids function call overhead and uses bitwise operations for integer arithmetic.
	* Cons: Requires understanding of bitwise operations and may be harder to read.

**Other Considerations**

The custom implementation relies on the fact that in two's complement representation, the most significant bit (MSB) indicates the sign of a binary number. By using `| 0`, the decimal result is effectively truncated to an integer, which can give an inaccurate result for negative numbers or non-integer divisions.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

In this benchmark, there are no external libraries used, but MeasureThat.net might use some internal mechanisms like Web Workers or Web Assembly (WASM) optimizations. However, the provided code snippets do not indicate any special JavaScript features, such as async/await, generators, or Promises.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to `Math.ceil()`, you can also consider:

1. `Math.floor()` and adding 0.5: `z = Math.floor(x/y) + 0.5`
2. Using a library like [Fastest-Is-Floor](https://github.com/mathias-poulin/ fastest-is-floor) that provides an optimized implementation of the ceiling function.

In summary, the benchmark highlights the trade-offs between using built-in functions like `Math.ceil()` and implementing custom optimizations like the bitwise operation approach. The choice ultimately depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

ceil vs code (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ceil vs code

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ceil

code

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):