Benchmark: math.pow vs ** using floats

Script Preparation code:

var array = []; 
for(var i = 1; i < 50; i++) {
  array.push(i + (i*3/13))
}

Tests:

math.pow
var num = 0; array.forEach((n) => { array.forEach((x) => { num = Math.pow(n,x); }) })
**
var num = 0; array.forEach((n) => { array.forEach((x) => { num = n**x }) })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
math.pow
**

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition for a comparison between `Math.pow` and the exponentiation operator (`**`) when dealing with floating-point numbers.

In this benchmark, we have two test cases:

1. `"math.pow"`: This test case uses the built-in `Math.pow` function to calculate the power of each number in an array.
2. "**": This test case uses the exponentiation operator (`**`) to calculate the power of each number in an array.

The script preparation code creates an array with floating-point numbers, and then iterates over the array using two nested `forEach` loops for each test case.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, we have two options being compared:

* `Math.pow`: The built-in function used to calculate the power of a number.
* "**": The exponentiation operator, which is shorthand for calculating the power of a number (`n ** x` is equivalent to `n ^ x`).

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* `Math.pow`:
	+ Pros:
		- Well-established and widely supported function.
		- Can handle negative exponents and fractional exponents correctly.
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower due to its methodical approach.
		- May have a higher overhead in terms of CPU cycles compared to the exponentiation operator.
* "**":
	+ Pros:
		- Faster execution, as it uses a more efficient algorithm under the hood.
		- Can be slightly more readable and concise than `Math.pow`.
	+ Cons:
		- Not all browsers support this operator (although most modern ones do).
		- May not work correctly with negative exponents or fractional exponents.

**Library and Purpose**

There is no library explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript implementations may use specialized libraries or functions for exponentiation, such as `Math.exp` or `Bignumber.js`.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The test case uses the syntax `${n} ** ${x}` to represent the exponentiation operator (`**`). This is a shorthand way of writing `n ** x`, and is supported in most modern browsers.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to implement this benchmark yourself, here are some alternatives:

* Use a different library for exponentiation, such as `Bignumber.js` or `Mathjs`.
* Implement the exponentiation operator using a loop instead of the built-in function.
* Compare the performance of `Math.pow` and the exponentiation operator with other libraries or functions, such as `lodash`, `ramda`, or `mathjs`.

Keep in mind that this benchmark is designed to compare specific implementations, so you may want to modify the test cases or add additional ones to better represent your use case.

Related benchmarks:

math.pow vs ** using floats (version: 0)

test math.pow vs ** while numbers are floats

Comparing performance of: math.pow vs **

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

math.pow

**

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):