Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Local function variables
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
No local func var vs Local func var
Created:
8 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<html></html>
Tests:
No local func var
var i; for (i=0; i<1000000; i++);
Local func var
function count() { var i; for (i=0; i<1000000; i++); } count();
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
No local func var
Local func var
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):
I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its test cases. **What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks that measure the execution time of a `for` loop with or without declaring a local variable within it. The benchmark aims to compare the performance of two approaches: 1. **No local function variable**: In this case, no explicit declaration of a variable is made within the loop. 2. **Local function variable**: A variable `i` is declared within the loop using the `var` keyword. **What are the pros and cons of each approach?** 1. **No local function variable**: * Pros: This approach is more efficient, as there's no additional memory allocation or garbage collection overhead. * Cons: The performance gain might be minimal due to the lack of a declared variable, which would otherwise allow for better loop optimization techniques. 2. **Local function variable**: * Pros: This approach allows for better optimization by the JavaScript engine, as it can use more efficient memory allocation and garbage collection strategies. * Cons: The performance gain might be significant due to the additional memory allocation overhead. **Library usage** There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided benchmark. However, some libraries like V8 (used by Chrome) or SpiderMonkey (used by Firefox) might optimize JavaScript execution differently, potentially affecting the results. **Special JS features or syntax** None of the test cases explicitly use special JavaScript features or syntax like `const`, `let`, arrow functions, or generators. **Other alternatives** To further explore the performance differences between these two approaches, you could consider: * **Using a different loop control mechanism**, such as an incrementing counter variable without declaring it within the loop. * **Adding additional variables to the loop**, such as using a declared variable for indexing into an array or accessing object properties. * **Comparing results across multiple browsers** or platforms to see if the performance difference is consistent. * **Using different JavaScript engines** or implementations, like Node.js's V8 engine or Mozilla's SpiderMonkey, to compare their optimization strategies. Keep in mind that the actual performance differences between these approaches might be small and influenced by various factors, including the specific use case, hardware, and environment.
Related benchmarks:
Functions vs arrow functions
eval vs new Function vs function vs creation
Arrow function vs closure function
Function vs function() {}
Func vs new Func vs eval
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?