Benchmark: filtrowanie2 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var arr = []
const randomValues = [[], null, undefined, 1, 2, 3, 4, true, false, "", {}, 0]

for (let i = 0; i < 10000000; i++) {
  const randomNumer = Math.floor(Math.random() * (12 - 0)) + 0;
  arr.push(randomValues[randomNumer])
}

Tests:

first
arr.filter(Boolean).length
second
arr.filter(e => e).length

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
first
second

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 provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that contains metadata about the test case. In this case, there are two individual test cases defined:

1. `filtrowanie2`
2. "first"
3. "second"

The script preparation code for each test case is provided:
```javascript
var arr = [];
const randomValues = [[], null, undefined, 1, 2, 3, 4, true, false, "", {}, 0];

for (let i = 0; i < 10000000; i++) {
    const randomNumer = Math.floor(Math.random() * (12 - 0)) + 0;
    arr.push(randomValues[randomNumer]);
}
```
This script creates an array `arr` with a large number of elements, each randomly chosen from the `randomValues` array.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case has two properties:

1. `Benchmark Definition`: This is the JavaScript expression that will be executed and timed.
2. `Test Name`: A human-readable name for the test case.

In this case, we have three test cases:

1. "first": `arr.filter(Boolean).length`
	* This test case filters out all falsy values from the array using the `Boolean` function and then measures the length of the resulting array.
2. "second": `arr.filter(e => e).length`
	* This test case filters out all falsy values from the array using a predicate function (i.e., `e => e`) and then measures the length of the resulting array.

**Comparison Options**

The two main comparison options are:

1. `Boolean` vs. implicit coercion
2. Function-based filtering (`e => e`) vs. predicate function

**Options Comparison**

Let's analyze each option:

**Option 1: `Boolean` vs. Implicit Coercion**

* **Pros**: Faster execution time, as the `Boolean` function is a built-in function that can be optimized by the JavaScript engine.
* **Cons**: May not work correctly for all use cases, especially when dealing with complex conditional expressions or edge cases.

**Option 2: Function-based filtering (`e => e`) vs. Predicate Function**

* **Pros**: More flexible and expressive than implicit coercion, allowing for more control over the filtering logic.
* **Cons**: May be slower due to the overhead of creating a function and calling it on each element in the array.

**Other Considerations**

1. **Array creation**: The benchmark creates a large array with 10 million elements, which can impact performance.
2. **Random values**: The use of random values may introduce variability in the results, but this is likely intended to simulate real-world data and make the benchmark more realistic.
3. **Browser engine**: The benchmark runs on Chrome 95, which may have optimized JavaScript execution.

**Alternative Approaches**

Some alternative approaches could be:

1. Using a different filtering function, such as `Array.prototype.filter` or `Lodash filter`.
2. Comparing the performance of other languages, such as Python or Java.
3. Adding more test cases with varying input sizes and types to simulate real-world scenarios.

Keep in mind that this is just an analysis of the provided benchmark, and there may be other factors at play that are not immediately apparent.

Related benchmarks:

filtrowanie2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: first vs second

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

first

second

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):