Benchmark: sto test2 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var capPdvFill ="a"

Tests:

old school
while(capPdvFill.length < 50) { capPdvFill = '0' + capPdvFill; } console.log(capPdvFill);
one method
console.log(capPdvFill.padStart(50, '0'));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
old school
one method

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.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and some pros/cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches to pad a string with leading zeros in JavaScript.

**Script Preparation Code**
```javascript
var capPdvFill = "a";
```
This code initializes a variable `capPdvFill` with a string value "a". The purpose of this script is not directly related to padding strings, but it seems to be a setup for the benchmark.

**Html Preparation Code**
There is no HTML preparation code provided in this benchmark.

**Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **"old school"`**

This test case uses a `while` loop to pad the string with leading zeros:
```javascript
while (capPdvFill.length < 50) {
  capPdvFill = '0' + capPdvFill;
}
console.log(capPdvFill);
```
The purpose of this approach is unclear, but it seems to be a manual way of padding the string.

2. **"one method"`**

This test case uses the `padStart()` method to pad the string with leading zeros:
```javascript
console.log(capPdvFill.padStart(50, '0'));
```
The purpose of this approach is clear: it's a standard JavaScript method for padding strings with leading zeros.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **"old school"`**
	+ Pros: None known.
	+ Cons:
		- Manual loop, which can be slower and more error-prone than the `padStart()` method.
		- Not a standard JavaScript method, which may limit its portability across browsers and environments.
* **"one method"`**
	+ Pros:
		- Standard JavaScript method for padding strings with leading zeros.
		- Faster and more efficient than the "old school" approach.
	+ Cons: None known.

**Library or Special JS Feature**

There is no library or special JS feature used in this benchmark. The `padStart()` method is a standard JavaScript method that is widely supported across browsers and environments.

**Other Alternatives**

In addition to the two approaches tested, there are other ways to pad strings with leading zeros in JavaScript:

* Using string multiplication: `capPdvFill += '0'.repeat(50);`
* Using the `String.prototype.padStart()` method (which is also used in the "one method" approach).
* Using a library like Lodash's `padEnd()` or `padStart()` methods.

These alternatives may offer different performance characteristics, trade-offs, or usability features compared to the two approaches tested in this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

sto test2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: old school vs one method

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

old school

one method

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):