Benchmark: FAST CEIL - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

Math.ceil(test)

Script Preparation code:

var test = 190.4;

Tests:

Math.floor(test)
Math.floor(test)
Math.floor(test) + 1
Math.floor(test) + 1
~~test
~~test
~~test + 1
~~test + 1
Math.ceil(test)
Math.ceil(test)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Math.floor(test)
Math.floor(test) + 1
~~test
~~test + 1
Math.ceil(test)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:135.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/135.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 135 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Math.floor(test)	1657214464.0 Ops/sec
Math.floor(test) + 1	1662753664.0 Ops/sec
~~test	1664050176.0 Ops/sec
~~test + 1	1666089600.0 Ops/sec
Math.ceil(test)	1664137088.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of different JavaScript operations is crucial to understand how various libraries and features affect the execution speed of code.

The provided JSON represents two benchmark cases:

**Benchmark Definition**

1. `FAST CEIL`: This benchmark tests the performance of calculating the ceiling of a floating-point number using the `Math.ceil()` function.
2. The other test cases compare the performance of different mathematical operations:
	* `Math.floor(test) + 1`
	* `~~test` (bitwise NOT)
	* `~~test + 1`

**Options Compared**

In each test case, two or more options are compared to determine which one is faster. The options include:

* Using the built-in `Math.ceil()` function
* Using arithmetic operations (`+`) with floating-point numbers
* Using bitwise NOT operator (`~~`)
* A combination of bitwise NOT and addition (`~~test + 1`)

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief analysis of each option's pros and cons:

* **Built-in `Math.ceil()`**: This is the recommended approach, as it provides an optimized implementation that's faster than manual arithmetic or bitwise operations.
	+ Pros: Typically the fastest, most reliable, and maintainable option.
	+ Cons: May not be suitable for very specific edge cases or custom use cases.
* **Arithmetic operations (`+`)**: This method is straightforward but can lead to potential precision issues due to floating-point arithmetic limitations.
	+ Pros: Easy to implement, flexible.
	+ Cons: Prone to precision errors, slower than `Math.ceil()`.
* **Bitwise NOT operator (`~~`)**: This method is efficient and widely supported but may not work as expected with certain data types or edge cases.
	+ Pros: Fast, compact, and portable.
	+ Cons: May not work correctly with negative numbers, non-integer values, or specific data types.

**Library Usage**

The `Math.floor()` function is a built-in JavaScript library that provides an optimized implementation for calculating the floor of a number. It's not a separate library but rather an integral part of the standard library.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None of the provided test cases utilize special JavaScript features or syntax beyond basic arithmetic and bitwise operations.

**Alternatives**

For those interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are some options:

* Use assembly language or native code to implement custom mathematical functions.
* Utilize specialized libraries or frameworks for high-performance numerical computations (e.g., NumJS, Highcharts).
* Implement your own bitwise NOT operator using bit manipulation instructions (e.g., `unsigned char not = (~test & 0xFF);`).

Please note that these alternatives may require significant expertise and resources to implement effectively.

Related benchmarks:

FAST CEIL (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Math.floor(test) vs Math.floor(test) + 1 vs test vs test + 1 vs Math.ceil(test)

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.floor(test)

Math.floor(test) + 1

~~test

~~test + 1

Math.ceil(test)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

FAST CEIL (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Math.floor(test) vs Math.floor(test) + 1 vs ~~test vs ~~test + 1 vs Math.ceil(test)

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Math.floor(test)

Math.floor(test) + 1

~~test

~~test + 1

Math.ceil(test)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Comparing performance of: Math.floor(test) vs Math.floor(test) + 1 vs test vs test + 1 vs Math.ceil(test)