Benchmark: Some benchmark >!>

Script Preparation code:

window.arr = Array.from(new Array(50).keys()).map((i) =>
  [1, 3].includes((i + 1) % 7) ? i * -1 : (i + 1) * 7
);

Tests:

For
const firstArr = new Array(window.arr.length); let firstArrIndex = 0; const secondArr = new Array(window.arr.length); let secondArrIndex = 0; for (let index = 0, length = window.arr.length; index < length; ++index) { if (window.arr[index] <= 0) { firstArr[firstArrIndex++] = window.arr[index]; } else { secondArr[secondArrIndex++] = window.arr[index]; } } for (let index = 0; index < secondArrIndex; ++index) { firstArr[firstArrIndex++] = secondArr[index]; } const result = firstArr; return result;
For_each
const firstArr = []; const secondArr = []; window.arr.forEach((element) => { if (element <= 0) { firstArr.push(element); } else { secondArr.push(element); } }); const result = firstArr.concat(secondArr); return result;
For push
const firstArr = []; const secondArr = []; window.arr.forEach((element) => { if (element <= 0) { firstArr.push(element); } else { secondArr.push(element); } }); const result = firstArr.concat(secondArr); return result;
Filter
const result = window.arr .filter((value) => value <= 0) .concat(window.arr.filter((value) => value > 0)); return result;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
For
For_each
For push
Filter

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 on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is provided in JSON format, which defines the characteristics of the test:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark.
* `Description`: An optional description of the benchmark.
* `Script Preparation Code`: A code snippet that is executed before running the test. In this case, it prepares an array (`window.arr`) with 50 elements, where every 7th element (starting from index 1) is negated and multiplied by 7 or 3 respectively.
* `Html Preparation Code`: An optional HTML code snippet that can be used to prepare the environment for the test. In this case, it's empty.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark definition includes four individual test cases:

1. **For**
2. **For_each**
3. **Filter**
4. **For push**

Each test case has a unique `Benchmark Definition` code snippet that defines the logic to be executed during the test.

**What is tested?**

These test cases measure the performance of different ways to separate positive and negative numbers in an array:

* **For**: Iterates over the array using a traditional for loop, pushing elements into two separate arrays based on their sign.
* **For_each**: Similar to `For`, but uses the `forEach` method to iterate over the array.
* **Filter**: Uses the `filter` method to create two new arrays with positive and negative numbers respectively, then concatenates them.
* **For push**: A variation of the `For` loop that uses the `push` method to add elements to an array.

**Options compared**

The test cases are designed to compare different approaches to achieving a similar result:

* Iterative vs. functional programming (For and For_each vs. Filter)
* Traditional for loops vs. modern array methods (For and For_each vs. Filter)

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **For**: Pros:
	* Easy to understand and implement.
	* Can be optimized using loop unrolling or other techniques.
	* Cons:
	* May have performance overhead due to the explicit loop.
2. **For_each**: Pros:
	* Modern and concise syntax.
	* Reduces code duplication.
	* Cons:
	* May have performance overhead due to the `forEach` method.
3. **Filter**: Pros:
	* Concise and readable syntax.
	* Reduces code duplication.
	* Cons:
	* May have performance overhead due to the creation of new arrays.
4. **For push**: Pros:
	* Efficient use of memory (no need for separate arrays).
	* Can be optimized using techniques like loop unrolling.

**Other considerations:**

* **Library usage**: The `forEach` method and the `filter` method are built-in JavaScript functions that can be used to simplify code.
* **Special JS features**: None mentioned in this benchmark.

**Alternatives:**

Other ways to separate positive and negative numbers in an array might include:

* Using a binary search tree or other data structure to efficiently partition elements based on their sign.
* Utilizing parallel processing or multithreading to take advantage of multiple CPU cores.

However, the current implementation using traditional loops, modern array methods, and `forEach` is a common and effective approach for many use cases.

Related benchmarks:

Some benchmark >!> (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: For vs For_each vs For push vs Filter

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

For

For_each

For push

Filter

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):