Benchmark: Powers of two - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

wiki
var container = "MRKU576275"; var con = container.toUpperCase(); for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) { var n = con.substr(i, 1); if (i < 4) { n = "0123456789A?BCDEFGHIJK?LMNOPQRSTU?VWXYZ".indexOf(con.substr(i, 1)); }; n *= Math.pow(2, i); sum += n; }; sum %= 11; sum %= 10; return sum
me
var container = "MRKU576275"; var con = container.toUpperCase(); var p = [1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512]; var s = 0; for (var n=0;n<10;n++) { if (n<4) { var c = con.charCodeAt(n)-55; s+=(Math.floor(c/10.2)+c)*p[n]; } else { s+=Number(con.charAt(n))*p[n]; }; }; var sum = s % 11 % 10; return sum

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
wiki
me

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.

**Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case named "Powers of two". The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to calculate the sum of powers of 2 for each digit in a given string.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition describes the problem statement:

* It takes a string `container` as input.
* It converts the first character of the string to uppercase using the `toUpperCase()` method.
* For the next 9 characters, it:
	+ If the character index is less than 4, it finds the corresponding ASCII code for the character using `charCodeAt()`, subtracts 55, and multiplies the result by a predefined array `p` (powers of 2).
	+ Otherwise, it converts the character to a number using `Number()` and multiplies it by the same powers of 2 array.

The benchmark is designed to measure the performance difference between these two approaches: using string operations (`toUpperCase()`, `charAt()`, `indexOf()`) versus numeric calculations (`charCodeAt()`, multiplication).

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **String-based approach**: This approach uses string methods to manipulate the input string, which may be slower due to the overhead of string creation and manipulation.
2. **Numeric-based approach**: This approach uses numeric operations to calculate the result directly, which is likely faster since it avoids the overhead of string manipulation.

**Pros and Cons**

* **String-based approach:**
	+ Pros:
		- Easier to read and understand for developers familiar with string manipulation.
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower due to string creation and manipulation overhead.
* **Numeric-based approach:**
	+ Pros:
		- Faster since it avoids string manipulation overhead.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires a deeper understanding of numeric operations and ASCII codes.

**Library and Special JS Features**

In the benchmark definition, the following library is used:

* None explicitly mentioned; however, `charCodeAt()` is a built-in method in JavaScript that returns an integer representing the Unicode character code at a given index in a string.

No special JavaScript features are used in this benchmark.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches to calculate the sum of powers of 2 for each digit could include:

* Using a regex pattern to extract each digit and apply the power operation.
* Implementing a custom algorithm using bitwise operations or modular arithmetic.
* Using a library or framework optimized for performance, such as NumJS.

These alternative approaches may have different performance characteristics and trade-offs depending on the specific requirements of the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Powers of two (version: 0)

If they should be written in an array or in the loop as we go

Comparing performance of: wiki vs me

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

wiki

me

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):