Benchmark: Invert Colors - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

Internet
function invertHex(hexnum) { hexnum = hexnum.toUpperCase(); var splitnum = hexnum.split(""); var resultnum = ""; var simplenum = "FEDCBA9876".split(""); var complexnum = new Array(); complexnum.A = "5"; complexnum.B = "4"; complexnum.C = "3"; complexnum.D = "2"; complexnum.E = "1"; complexnum.F = "0"; for(i=0; i<6; i++){ if(!isNaN(splitnum[i])) { resultnum += simplenum[splitnum[i]]; } else if(complexnum[splitnum[i]]){ resultnum += complexnum[splitnum[i]]; } else { alert("Hex colors must only include hex numbers 0-9, and A-F"); return false; } } return resultnum; } invertHex("123456");
Mine
function invertHex(hexnum) { return ('000000' + (0xffffff - parseInt(hexnum, 16)).toString(16)).slice(-6); } invertHex("123456");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Internet
Mine

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.

Measuring performance differences between various approaches is crucial in software development. Let's break down the benchmark test case provided.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided JSON defines a simple benchmark with two test cases:

* "Invert Colors" - This is the name of the benchmark, and its purpose is to compare the execution times of two different functions that invert a hexadecimal color code.
* The JSON also includes script preparation code and HTML preparation code, but in this case, they are empty.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Internet**: This test case uses a custom implementation of the `invertHex` function. The function takes a hexadecimal number as input, converts it to uppercase, splits it into individual characters, and then iterates through each character to perform the inversion.
2. **Mine**: This test case also uses a custom implementation of the `invertHex` function but with a different approach. It uses a mathematical formula to directly invert the hexadecimal color code without iterating through each character.

**Library Usage**

There is no library usage in these test cases, so there's nothing to comment on in this regard.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The `Math.prototype.toString()` and `parseInt()` methods are used in the "Mine" implementation. These features are standard in JavaScript and don't require any special knowledge to understand.

**Approach Comparison**

There are two approaches being compared:

1. **Custom Iterative Approach (Internet)**: This approach involves splitting the input hexadecimal number into individual characters, iterating through each character, and performing the inversion.
	* Pros:
		+ Can handle complex cases where the input may contain non-numeric characters.
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower due to the iteration process.
2. **Mathematical Formula Approach (Mine)**: This approach uses a mathematical formula to directly invert the hexadecimal color code without iterating through each character.
	* Pros:
		+ Typically faster since it avoids iteration.
	* Cons:
		+ May not handle complex cases as well as the iterative approach.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors:

* Performance: If speed is critical, the mathematical formula approach may be a better choice. However, if you need to handle complex cases or non-numeric characters, the custom iterative approach might be more suitable.
* Code Complexity: The custom iterative approach can be more readable and easier to understand due to its straightforward nature.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for inverting hexadecimal color codes could include:

1. Using a library like `hexa-invert` (not used in this benchmark).
2. Implementing a more complex algorithm, such as using bitwise operations.
3. Using a different programming language or a compiled language that can execute JavaScript natively.

In conclusion, the choice between these two approaches depends on your specific use case and priorities. If performance is crucial and you need to handle simple cases, the mathematical formula approach might be the better choice. However, if you need to handle complex cases or non-numeric characters, the custom iterative approach is more suitable.

Related benchmarks:

Invert Colors (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Internet vs Mine

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Internet

Mine

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):