Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
random id gen
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
nanoid vs generatecode
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
function nanoid(t = 21) { crypto.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(t)).reduce(((t, e) => t += (e &= 63) < 36 ? e.toString(36) : e < 62 ? (e - 26).toString(36).toUpperCase() : e < 63 ? "_" : "-"), ""); } function generateCode(length, containUppercase, groups = 0) { let result = ''; let characters = containUppercase ? 'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789' : 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'; let charactersLength = characters.length; for (let i = 0; i < length; i++) { result += characters.charAt(Math.floor(Math.random() * charactersLength)); } if (groups) result = result.split('').map((l, i, a) => (i + 1) % groups == 0 && i != a.length - 1 ? l + '-' : l).join('') return result; }
Tests:
nanoid
for (let i = 0; i < 100000; i++) { nanoid(); }
generatecode
for (let i = 0; i < 100000; i++) { generateCode(21, true); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
nanoid
generatecode
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 126 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
nanoid
5.1 Ops/sec
generatecode
2.9 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'll explain the provided benchmark in detail. **Benchmark Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark definition and test cases measure the execution time of two different functions: `nanoid` and `generateCode`. **Function Explanation** 1. **`nanoid` function**: This function generates a random ID using the `crypto.getRandomValues` API, which is part of the Web Cryptography API. It takes an optional argument `t`, which specifies the length of the generated ID (default value is 21). The function uses bitwise operations to concatenate hexadecimal digits to create a random ID. 2. **`generateCode` function**: This function generates a randomly generated string with a specified length and optionally contains uppercase letters. The function takes three arguments: `length`, `containUppercase`, and `groups`. The `length` argument specifies the number of characters in the generated string, while `containUppercase` is a boolean flag that enables or disables the use of uppercase letters. The `groups` argument (default value is 0) allows for grouping consecutive characters with a specific separator. **Benchmark Comparison** The provided benchmark compares the execution time of two test cases: 1. **`nanoid`**: This test case measures the execution time of calling the `nanoid` function 100,000 times. 2. **`generateCode(21, true)`**: This test case measures the execution time of calling the `generateCode` function with a length of 21 and containing uppercase letters (i.e., `containUppercase` is set to `true`). The test case generates 100,000 strings using this specific configuration. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares two different approaches: 1. **`nanoid`**: This approach uses the Web Cryptography API (`crypto.getRandomValues`) to generate random numbers. 2. **`generateCode(21, true)`**: This approach uses a custom function to generate a randomly generated string with a specified length and optional uppercase letters. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **`nanoid`**: * Pros: Uses the Web Cryptography API, which provides a secure way to generate random numbers. * Cons: May be slower than other approaches due to its cryptographic overhead. 2. **`generateCode(21, true)`**: * Pros: Can potentially produce faster results since it doesn't rely on cryptographic functions. * Cons: Uses a custom function that might not be optimized for performance. **Library and Special JS Features** In this benchmark, the `crypto.getRandomValues` API is used to generate random numbers. This API is part of the Web Cryptography API and provides a secure way to generate cryptographically strong random numbers. No special JavaScript features or syntax are mentioned in the benchmark definition. **Alternative Approaches** Other possible approaches to generating random IDs or strings include: 1. **Math.random()**: Using the `Math.random()` function to generate random numbers. 2. **Random number generators libraries**: Utilizing external libraries like `random-seed` or `rand()` that provide fast and efficient random number generation. 3. **Hash functions**: Using hash functions like SHA-256 or MD5 to generate a fixed-size string. Keep in mind that these alternatives might have different performance characteristics, security implications, and code complexity compared to the approaches used in the benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
Random ID generate
Random hex string generation benchmark
Object.create(null) vs {} vs Map() key access (heavy)
Split vs Spread (randomized)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?