Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
1232121
(version: 0)
1211
Comparing performance of:
t1 vs t2
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
t1
var customer_no = ""; var chk_no = "1232132132112" + ","; customer_no += chk_no;
t2
var customer_no = ""; var chk_no = "1232132132112" + ","; customer_no += chk_no;
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
t1
t2
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 the benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of JavaScript microbenchmarks. It appears to be focused on string concatenation, specifically the use of the `+` operator to concatenate strings. **Options Compared** In this benchmark, two options are being compared: 1. **Using the `+` operator**: This option uses the standard `+` operator to concatenate the strings. 2. **No operator ( implicit concatenation)**: In this option, no explicit operator is used, and the JavaScript engine is expected to perform implicit concatenation. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **Using the `+` operator**: This approach is straightforward and easy to read. It's also a common way to concatenate strings in JavaScript. * Pros: Easy to understand and maintain. * Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of the `+` operator. 2. **No operator (implicit concatenation)**: In modern JavaScript engines, implicit concatenation is optimized and can be faster than explicit concatenation using the `+` operator. * Pros: Can be faster due to optimization. * Cons: May not be immediately clear to readers who are not familiar with this optimization. **Other Considerations** In addition to the two options being compared, the benchmark also includes metadata such as: * **Browser**: The benchmark is run on Chrome 95 on a Windows Desktop. * **DevicePlatform**: The benchmark is executed on a desktop device. * **OperatingSystem**: The benchmark is executed on Windows. **Library and Special JS Features** There are no libraries or special JavaScript features being used in this benchmark. It appears to be a basic, standalone test case. **Alternative Approaches** If you wanted to modify the benchmark to compare other string concatenation approaches, you could consider adding additional options, such as: * Using `concat()` method * Using template literals (`${}`) * Using a library like Lodash or Underscore.js Keep in mind that each of these alternatives would introduce new variables and complexities to the benchmark. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The provided script preparation code is empty, which means that no special setup or initialization code is required for this benchmark. The HTML preparation code is also empty, indicating that no additional setup is needed for the HTML environment. Overall, the benchmark appears to be a straightforward test case focused on string concatenation performance in JavaScript.
Related benchmarks:
reverse number
reverse number
Number Conversion Speed
trailingZeroes removal
Verifica CNPJ
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?