Benchmark: Size format functions - fix

Script Preparation code:

    function formatSize0(sizeBytes) {
        if (sizeBytes === 0) {
            return "0";
        }

        if (sizeBytes === 0) {
            return "0";
        }

        const kbyte = 1024;
        const mbyte = 1048576;
        const gbyte = 1073741824;
        const tbyte = 1099511627776;
        
        if (sizeBytes > tbyte) {
            return `${(sizeBytes / tbyte).toFixed(2)} TiB`;
        } else if (sizeBytes > gbyte) {
            return `${(sizeBytes / gbyte).toFixed(2)} GiB`;
        } else if (sizeBytes > mbyte) {
            return `${(sizeBytes / mbyte).toFixed(2)} MiB`;
        } else if (sizeBytes > kbyte) {
            return `${(sizeBytes / kbyte).toFixed(2)} KiB`;
        } else {
            return "" + sizeBytes;
        }
    }

    function formatSize1(sizeBytes) {
        if (sizeBytes === 0) {
            return "0";
        }

        const kbyte = 1024;
        const formats = ["", "KiB", "MiB", "GiB", "TiB", "PiB", "EiB", "ZiB", "YiB"];

        const formatIndex = Math.floor(Math.log(sizeBytes) / Math.log(kbyte));

        return `${parseFloat((sizeBytes / kbyte ** formatIndex).toFixed(2))} ${formats[formatIndex]}`;
    }

Tests:

Format 0
formatSize0(477393); formatSize0(329842980); formatSize0(20); formatSize0(23908423904829022); formatSize0(3156212643);
Format 1
formatSize1(477393); formatSize1(329842980); formatSize1(20); formatSize1(23908423904829022); formatSize1(3156212643);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Format 0
Format 1

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.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark measures the performance of two different approaches for formatting file sizes in JavaScript. The goal is to compare the execution speed of these approaches and identify the most efficient one.

**Approach 1: Conditional Statements (formatSize0)**

This approach uses a series of conditional statements to determine the correct format for a given file size. It checks the size against predefined thresholds (0 bytes, 1024 bytes, 1048576 bytes, etc.) and returns the corresponding formatted string.

Pros:

* Easy to understand and implement
* Works correctly for most cases

Cons:

* Can be slow due to the number of conditional statements
* May not perform well for large inputs

**Approach 2: Logarithmic Scaling (formatSize1)**

This approach uses logarithmic scaling to determine the correct format. It calculates the base-1024 logarithm of the file size and uses this value to select the corresponding format string from an array.

Pros:

* Can handle large inputs more efficiently
* May be faster than Approach 1 for larger files

Cons:

* Requires a logarithmic calculation, which can introduce overhead
* May not work correctly if the input is not a power of 1024

**Library and Special Features**

There are no external libraries used in this benchmark. However, JavaScript does have some special features that might be relevant to understanding this code:

* **Conditional Statements**: Used extensively in Approach 1.
* **Math.log()**: Used in Approach 2 for logarithmic scaling.

**Other Considerations**

* **Performance Optimization**: When writing performance-critical code, it's essential to consider the trade-offs between readability, maintainability, and execution speed. In this case, Approach 2 might be a better choice for large files, but Approach 1 is more straightforward to understand.
* **Error Handling**: Both approaches assume that the input file size will always be non-negative. Consider adding error handling for invalid inputs.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives could include:

* Using a library like `lodash` or `moment` for formatting dates and sizes
* Implementing a more efficient algorithm for logarithmic scaling, such as using a lookup table
* Using a Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler to optimize the execution speed of the benchmark

Overall, this benchmark provides a useful comparison between two different approaches for formatting file sizes in JavaScript. By understanding the pros and cons of each approach, developers can make informed decisions about which method to use in their own code.

Related benchmarks:

Size format functions - fix (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Format 0 vs Format 1

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Format 0

Format 1

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):