Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
binaryStringPad
(version: 0)
testing 3 methods of padding binary string
Comparing performance of:
padStart vs slice vs while
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
padStart
let b_seq = '11111'; let b_mid = '11111'; let b_time = '11111'; b_seq = b_seq.padStart(12,'0'); b_mid = b_mid.padStart(10,'0'); b_time = b_time.padStart(41,'0');
slice
let b_seq = '11111'; let b_mid = '11111'; let b_time = '11111'; b_seq = ('000000000000'+b_seq).slice(-12); b_mid = ('0000000000'+b_mid).slice(-10); b_time = ('00000000000000000000000000000000000000000'+b_time).slice(-41);
while
let b_seq = '11111'; let b_mid = '11111'; let b_time = '11111'; while (b_seq.length < 12) b_seq = "0" + b_seq; while (b_mid.length < 10) b_mid = "0" + b_mid; while (b_time.length < 41) b_time = "0" + b_time;
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
padStart
slice
while
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 provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros/cons. **Benchmark Overview** The `binaryStringPad` benchmark is designed to compare three methods for padding binary strings: `padStart`, `slice`, and `while`. The goal is to determine which method is most efficient in terms of performance. **Methods Compared** 1. **padStart**: This method uses the `padStart()` method, which pads a string with a specified character (in this case, '0') until it reaches a minimum length. 2. **slice**: This method uses the `slice()` method to extract a portion of a string. In this benchmark, it's used to pad the string by appending zeros. 3. **while**: This method uses a loop to append zeros to the end of the string until its desired length is reached. **Pros and Cons** * **padStart**: * Pros: Simple and concise syntax. * Cons: May not be as efficient as other methods, especially for longer strings. * **slice**: * Pros: Efficient use of string manipulation capabilities. * Cons: May have performance issues due to the overhead of slicing a large string. * **while**: * Pros: Allows for fine-grained control over padding logic. * Cons: Can be slower than other methods due to the loop. **Library and Special Features** In this benchmark, no external libraries are used. However, it's worth noting that `slice()` method is part of the ECMAScript standard and is widely supported across browsers. The benchmark also uses a feature called "raw UA string" which provides information about the browser's user agent string. This can be useful for identifying specific browser versions or platforms. **Other Alternatives** If you wanted to test padding binary strings, you could use other methods such as: * Using `String.prototype.padEnd()` method. * Creating a custom function for padding strings. * Utilizing a library like Lodash that provides various string manipulation functions. These alternatives might offer different trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and maintainability.
Related benchmarks:
parse hex to bytes
padLeft comparison
Intl.Collator.compare vs String.prototype.localeCompare (v8 ASCII fast path)
TextDecoder vs String.fromCharCode Big
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?