Benchmark: Test_every_2 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var array_1 = [{id: 1}, {id: 2}, {id: 3}, {id: 4}, {id: 5}];
var array_2 = [{id: 6}, {id: 7}, {id: 8}];
var array_3 = [{id: 9}, {id: 10}, {id: 11}, {id: 12}, {id: 13}];

var ids_to_check = [1, 5, 8, 6, 11, 3];

Tests:

test_1
var joined_array = [ array_1, array_2, array_3, ] var counter = 0; joined_array.every(array => { array.every((object, i) => { if (ids_to_check.includes(object.id)) { array[i] = { ... object, updated: true }; counter++; } return counter >= ids_to_check.length; }); return counter >= ids_to_check.length; })
test_2
// main algorithm // joining all the sub-arrays into one array var joinedArray = [array_1, array_2, array_3]; // calculating total number of elements from all sub-arrays inside var joinedArrayTotalLength = joinedArray.reduce( (totalLength, subArray) => (totalLength += subArray.length), 0 ); var pointer = { arrayIdx: 0, elementIdx: 0 }; var updatedElementsCounter = 0; for (let i = 0; i < joinedArrayTotalLength; i++) { // switching between the sub-arrays if we are out of the previous one if (pointer.elementIdx > joinedArray[pointer.arrayIdx].length - 1) { pointer.arrayIdx++; pointer.elementIdx = 0; } var currentElement = joinedArray[pointer.arrayIdx][pointer.elementIdx]; // safe undefined element handling if (!currentElement) { i--; pointer.elementIdx++; continue; } // updating element in the source array if (ids_to_check.includes(currentElement.id)) { joinedArray[pointer.arrayIdx][pointer.elementIdx] = { ...currentElement, updated: true, }; updatedElementsCounter++; } if (updatedElementsCounter === ids_to_check.length) { break; } pointer.elementIdx++; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test_1
test_2

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 is an essential aspect of software development, and it's great that you're utilizing MeasureThat.net to benchmark your JavaScript code.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition for two test cases. Here's what each part tests:

* `Script Preparation Code`: This section initializes three arrays (`array_1`, `array_2`, and `array_3`) with sample data and defines an array (`ids_to_check`) containing indices to be checked.
* `Html Preparation Code`: There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means the benchmark focuses solely on JavaScript execution.

**Test Cases**

The two test cases are:

1. `test_1`:
	* Joins all sub-arrays into one using the `every()` method and updates elements in the original arrays based on the `ids_to_check` array.
	* This approach uses a higher-level, more concise syntax but may incur overhead due to method calls and additional memory allocations.
2. `test_2`:
	* Main algorithm: Joins all sub-arrays into one using simple indexing (`joinedArray[pointer.arrayIdx][pointer.elementIdx]`) and updates elements in the original arrays based on the `ids_to_check` array.
	* This approach uses a lower-level, more explicit syntax but may require more manual memory management and loop iterations.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

1. `test_1` (Higher-level syntax):
	* Pros:
		+ More concise and readable code
		+ Easier to maintain and modify
	* Cons:
		+ May incur overhead due to method calls and additional memory allocations
2. `test_2` (Lower-level syntax):
	* Pros:
		+ More control over the loop and indexing
		+ Can be more efficient in terms of memory usage
	* Cons:
		+ More verbose and error-prone code
		+ Requires manual memory management

**Library Usage**

The `Array.prototype.every()` method is used in `test_1`, which is a built-in JavaScript method. The `Object.assign()` method (`... object`) is also used, but it's not explicitly mentioned as a library.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntaxes being utilized in these benchmarks. Both approaches use standard JavaScript concepts and methods.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative benchmarking strategies, consider the following:

1. Profiling: Use tools like Chrome DevTools or Node.js Inspector to profile your code's performance at runtime.
2. Microbenchmarking libraries: Explore libraries like `micro-benchmark` (for Node.js) or ` benchmark-chrome-ext` (for Chrome extensions).
3. Loop unrolling: If you're concerned about loop iterations, consider using loop unrolling techniques to reduce the number of iterations.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not provide a direct comparison to MeasureThat.net's approach, but they can be useful for further performance optimization and tuning.

Related benchmarks:

Test_every_2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: test_1 vs test_2

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

test_1

test_2

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):