Benchmark: Hallo Welt 123 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<style>
  #before:before {
  	content: "a";
 	 display: none;
  }
  @media(min-width: 200px) {
  	#body {
  		background: red;
  	content: "b";
  	}
  }
  @media(min-width: 600px) {
  	#body {
  		background: blue;
  	content: "c";
  	}
  }
  @media(min-width: 1000px) {
  	#body {
  		background: yellow;
  	content: "d";
  	}
  }
</style>
<div id="body">
</div>

Tests:

new
const matchMedia1 = window.matchMedia("(min-width: 400px)"); const matchMedia2 = window.matchMedia("(min-width: 700px)"); const matchMedia3 = window.matchMedia("(min-width: 1000px)"); const matchMedia4 = window.matchMedia("(min-width: 1200px)"); matchMedia1.addListener((query) => { if (query.matches) { console.log(true); } }) matchMedia2.addListener((query) => { if (query.matches) { console.log(true); } }) matchMedia3.addListener((query) => { if (query.matches) { console.log(true); } }) matchMedia4.addListener((query) => { if (query.matches) { console.log(true); } })
normal
let conf = { breakpoints: { mobile: { max: 768, min: 0 }, tablet: { min: 768 }, desktop: { min: 1024, }, tabletOnly: { min: 768, max: 1024 }, }, isMobile: false, isTablet: false, isDesktop: false, isTabletOnly: false } window.addEventListener('resize', () => { const width = document.documentElement.clientWidth; conf.isMobile = width < conf.breakpoints.mobile.max conf.isTablet = width >= conf.breakpoints.tablet.min conf.isDesktop = width >= conf.breakpoints.desktop.min conf.isTabletOnly = width >= conf.breakpoints.tabletOnly.min && width < conf.breakpoints.tabletOnly.max });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
new
normal

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'd be happy to explain what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that contains two test cases: "new" and "normal". The script preparation code is a set of HTML styles that create an empty `#body` element on the page. This code is executed before running each test case.

**Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **"new"**: This test case uses the `window.matchMedia()` API to create four media queries: `(min-width: 400px)`, `(min-width: 700px)`, `(min-width: 1000px)`, and `(min-width: 1200px)`. Each query is added as a listener to match the specified width range. When the query matches, it logs `true` to the console.
2. **"normal"**: This test case defines an object `conf` that contains breakpoints for mobile, tablet, desktop, and tablet-only devices. It also sets up an event listener for the `resize` event on the window object. When the window is resized, it updates the `conf` object based on the current width.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases are compared in terms of their performance when executing the media queries and updating the `conf` object. The "new" test case creates four separate listeners for each query, while the "normal" test case uses a single event listener to update the `conf` object based on the current width.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **"new"**: Pros:
	+ Each query is executed independently, which might be desirable if they have different dependencies or side effects.
	+ It's easy to understand and analyze the code.
Cons:
	+ There are four separate listeners, which can lead to more memory usage and slower execution times.
	+ The queries are not optimized together, as they're executed separately.
* **"normal"**: Pros:
	+ Only one event listener is created, which reduces memory usage and might improve performance.
	+ The queries are optimized together, as the `conf` object is updated based on the current width.
Cons:
	+ It's harder to understand and analyze the code, especially for those unfamiliar with the `conf` object.
	+ There might be side effects or dependencies between the different breakpoints.

**Other Considerations**

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

* Memory usage: If memory efficiency is crucial, the "normal" approach might be a better choice due to the single event listener.
* Code complexity: If readability and maintainability are more important than performance, the "new" approach might be easier to understand and work with.
* Query dependencies: If the queries have different dependencies or side effects, it's better to use separate listeners like in the "new" test case.

**Library**

There is no explicit library mentioned in this benchmark. However, `window.matchMedia()` is a part of the W3C Web API, and the `conf` object is defined manually.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these test cases. They only utilize standard JavaScript syntax for defining functions, objects, and event listeners.

Related benchmarks:

Hallo Welt 123 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: new vs normal

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

new

normal

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):