Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Bitwise vs String feature flags
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Bitwise - Existing vs Bitwise - Non-Existing vs String - Existing vs String - Non-Existing
Created:
8 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var BITWISE_FEATURE_A = 1; var BITWISE_FEATURE_B = BITWISE_FEATURE_A<<1; var BITWISE_FEATURE_C = BITWISE_FEATURE_B<<1; var BITWISE_ENABLED = BITWISE_FEATURE_A ^ BITWISE_FEATURE_C; var STRING_FEATURE_A = "yellow_scrollbar"; var STRING_FEATURE_B = "green_box"; var STRING_FEATURE_C = "blue_banner"; var STRING_ENABLED = STRING_FEATURE_A + STRING_FEATURE_C;
Tests:
Bitwise - Existing
BITWISE_ENABLED & BITWISE_FEATURE_A === BITWISE_FEATURE_A
Bitwise - Non-Existing
BITWISE_ENABLED & BITWISE_FEATURE_B === BITWISE_FEATURE_B
String - Existing
STRING_ENABLED.indexOf(STRING_FEATURE_C) !== -1
String - Non-Existing
STRING_ENABLED.indexOf(STRING_FEATURE_B) !== -1
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Bitwise - Existing
Bitwise - Non-Existing
String - Existing
String - Non-Existing
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):
I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros/cons of each approach. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark defines two feature flags: 1. `BITWISE_FEATURE_A` (an integer value) 2. `STRING_FEATURE_A`, `STRING_FEATURE_B`, and `STRING_FEATURE_C` (string values) Two bitwise operations are performed on these feature flags: * `BITWISE_FEATURE_A << 1` (left shift by 1 bit) * `BITWISE_FEATURE_B << 1` (left shift by 1 bit, which is not a valid operation since `BITWISE_FEATURE_B` is not defined) Additionally, two string operations are performed: * Concatenation: `STRING_ENABLED = STRING_FEATURE_A + STRING_FEATURE_C` The benchmark consists of four test cases: **Test Cases** 1. **Bitwise - Existing**: Check if the bitwise AND operation between `BITWISE_ENABLED` and `BITWISE_FEATURE_A` equals `BITWISE_FEATURE_A`. (`BITWISE_ENABLED & BITWISE_FEATURE_A === BITWISE_FEATURE_A`) 2. **Bitwise - Non-Existing**: Check if the bitwise AND operation between `BITWISE_ENABLED` and `BITWISE_FEATURE_B` equals `BITWISE_FEATURE_B`. (Note: `BITWISE_FEATURE_B` is not defined in the benchmark definition) 3. **String - Existing**: Check if the string index of `STRING_ENABLED` contains `STRING_FEATURE_C`. (`STRING_ENABLED.indexOf(STRING_FEATURE_C) !== -1`) 4. **String - Non-Existing**: Check if the string index of `STRING_ENABLED` contains `STRING_FEATURE_B`. (Note: `STRING_FEATURE_B` is not defined in the benchmark definition) **Comparison** The test cases are comparing the behavior of bitwise and string operations on these feature flags. * Bitwise operations: + `BITWISE_FEATURE_A << 1` is a valid operation since it's performing a left shift by 1 bit. + `BITWISE_FEATURE_B << 1` is not a valid operation since `BITWISE_FEATURE_B` is not defined. This might indicate an error or omission in the benchmark definition. * String operations: + Concatenation: `STRING_ENABLED = STRING_FEATURE_A + STRING_FEATURE_C` + Indexing: `STRING_ENABLED.indexOf(STRING_FEATURE_C)` and `STRING_ENABLED.indexOf(STRING_FEATURE_B)` **Pros/Cons of each approach** 1. **Bitwise - Existing**: This test case is testing the correct behavior of bitwise AND operation on a defined feature flag. 2. **Bitwise - Non-Existing**: This test case is likely to fail since `BITWISE_FEATURE_B` is not defined, and attempting to perform a bitwise AND operation will result in an error or undefined behavior. 3. **String - Existing**: This test case is testing the correct behavior of string indexing on a concatenated feature flag. 4. **String - Non-Existing**: Similar to the Bitwise - Non-Existing test case, this one might fail due to `STRING_FEATURE_B` not being defined. **Other Considerations** * The benchmark definition contains some missing or invalid data (e.g., `BITWISE_FEATURE_B`). * The test cases assume that the feature flags are initialized correctly and have the expected values. * The benchmark results show a mix of successful and failed test cases, which might indicate issues with the benchmark setup or hardware/OS variations. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for running microbenchmarks on JavaScript could include: 1. Micro- benchmarking libraries like ` Benchmark.js` or `Benchmark-chrome` 2. Custom benchmarking scripts using Node.js's built-in timing functions (e.g., `process.cpuTimeDomain`) 3. Browser-specific benchmarking tools, such as Google Chrome's `benchmarks` tool
Related benchmarks:
bitwise operator vs. boolean logic when using TypedArrays
floor() vs trunc() vs bitwise hacks (~~, >> 0, etc)
floor() vs trunc() vs bitwise hacks (~~, >> 0, etc) 2
Flooring with different Bitwise operators Fixed
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() vs bitwise, also trunc, floor
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?