Benchmark: spilce slice reverse

Script Preparation code:

    var list = [];
    for (var i = 0; i < 1000 * 1000; i++) {
        list.push(i);
    }

Tests:

1
list.push(...Array(11)) list = list.slice(-11); list.reverse();
2
list.push(...Array(11)) list.reverse(); list.splice(-11);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1
2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 135 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
1	6797492.5 Ops/sec
2	12058676.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition JSON provides information about the test case being executed. In this case, there are two individual test cases:

1. Test Case 1: `list.push(...Array(11))\r\nlist = list.slice(-11);\r\nlist.reverse();`
	* This code creates an array of 1000 elements and then reverses it using the `reverse()` method.
2. Test Case 2: `list.push(...Array(11))\r\nlist.reverse()\r\nlist.splice(-11);`
	* This code creates an array of 1000 elements, reverses it using the `reverse()` method, and then removes the last 11 elements using the `splice()` method.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare different approaches to reversing an array:

1. **Reversing and Then Removing**: Test Case 2 uses this approach.
	* Pros: Easy to understand and implement.
	* Cons: May involve unnecessary work, as the array is reversed twice (once explicitly and once implicitly during `splice()`).
2. **Creating a New Array and Replacing**: Test Case 1 creates a new array with the desired elements using the spread operator (`Array(11)`), replaces the original array with this new one, and then reverses it.
	* Pros: More efficient than reversing twice, as only one reversal operation is needed.
	* Cons: May be less intuitive for readers who are not familiar with the spread operator.

**Other Considerations**

When writing JavaScript benchmarks, consider the following:

* **Use meaningful names**: Use descriptive variable and function names to make your code easy to understand.
* **Minimize unnecessary work**: Avoid performing operations that don't affect the result of the benchmark.
* **Test for edge cases**: Include test cases that cover edge scenarios, such as large arrays or extreme performance conditions.

**Library Usage**

None of the provided benchmarks use any external libraries. However, if you were to extend this benchmarking system, consider including libraries like:

* `lodash`: A popular utility library with various array methods, such as `slice()` and `reverse()`.
* `Array.prototype.slice()`: This method is part of the standard JavaScript API and can be used for testing.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None of the provided benchmarks use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's considered standard in modern browsers. However, if you were to extend this system, consider including tests for:

* **ES6+ features**: Such as `const`, `let`, `class`, and `async/await`.
* **Web APIs**: Like `Window.fetch()`, `Navigator.geolocation()`, or `Worker`.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative benchmarking tools or platforms, consider the following:

* **Benchmark.js**: A popular JavaScript benchmarking framework that allows you to write custom benchmarks and compare their performance.
* **Google Benchmark**: A high-performance benchmarking library developed by Google that provides a simple way to create and compare microbenchmarks.

I hope this explanation helps!

Related benchmarks:

spilce slice reverse (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 1 vs 2

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

1

2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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