Benchmark: Clamp: min/max vs ternary

Tests:

ternary
const values = [111, 222, 333, 444, 555, 666, 777, 888, 999]; const min = 300; const max = 700; const clamped = values.map(value => value < min ? min : value > max ? max : value);
min/max
const values = [111, 222, 333, 444, 555, 666, 777, 888, 999]; const min = 300; const max = 700; const clamped = values.map(value => Math.max(min, Math.min(value, max)));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ternary
min/max

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 break down what's being tested in this JavaScript microbenchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches for clamping values within a specified range:

1. **Ternary Operator**: `value < min ? min : value > max ? max : value`
2. **Math.max() and Math.min()**: `Math.max(min, Math.min(value, max))`

**Options Compared**

These two approaches are compared in terms of performance, which is what the benchmark aims to measure.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **Ternary Operator**:
	* Pros: Concise and easy to read.
	* Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of the ternary operator's syntax.
2. **Math.max() and Math.min()**:
	* Pros: More straightforward and potentially faster, as it leverages built-in functions with optimized implementations.
	* Cons: Requires more code lines, making it slightly less concise.

**Library Used**

In both test cases, no external libraries are used.

**Special JavaScript Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in these test cases.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to implement this benchmark, you could also consider the following alternatives:

1. **Using a loop**: Instead of using array methods like `map()`, you could use a simple loop to iterate over the values.
2. **Caching intermediate results**: If performance is critical, you might consider caching intermediate results to avoid recalculating them in each iteration.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided Script Preparation Code is empty, which means no additional setup or preparation is required for the benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case consists of a single `Benchmark Definition` string that defines the logic for clamping values. The two test cases are:

1. **"ternary"`**: Uses the ternary operator to clamp values.
2. **"min/max"`**: Uses Math.max() and Math.min() to clamp values.

The test user can choose one of these approaches, and MeasureThat.net will execute it multiple times to determine the performance difference between them.

Related benchmarks:

Clamp: min/max vs ternary (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ternary vs min/max

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ternary

min/max

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):