Benchmark: switch vs if in the case of a simple dml

Script Preparation code:

window.actions = ['i', 'd', 'r', 'm', 'f', 'x', 'c', 'p'];

window.generateRandomCommand = () => {
  const action = window.actions[Math.floor(Math.random() * window.actions.length)];
  const start = Math.floor(Math.random() * 10);
  const end = start + Math.floor(Math.random() * 10);
  const text = Math.random().toString(36).substring(7);
  return `${action} ${start} ${end} ${text}`;
};

Tests:

switch
const version1 = cmd => { const action = cmd[0]; if (!window.actions.includes(action)) { throw new Error('Invalid action'); } const result = { action }; switch (action) { case 'i': result.start = parseInt(cmd[2]); result.text = cmd.slice(4); break; case 'd': result.start = parseInt(cmd[2]); result.end = parseInt(cmd[4]); break; case 'r': result.start = parseInt(cmd[2]); result.end = parseInt(cmd[4]); result.text = cmd.slice(6); break; case 'm': result.start = parseInt(cmd[2]); result.end = parseInt(cmd[4]); result.newPos = parseInt(cmd[6]); break; case 'f': result.search = cmd.slice(2); break; case 'x': case 'c': result.start = parseInt(cmd[2]); result.end = parseInt(cmd[4]); break; default: throw new Error('Invalid action'); } return result; }; const command = window.generateRandomCommand(); version1(command);
if
const version2 = cmd => { const action = cmd[0] if (!window.actions.includes(action)) { throw new Error('Invalid action') } const result = { action } if (action !== 'f') { result.start = parseInt(cmd[2]) } if (action !== 'i' && action !== 'f') { result.end = parseInt(cmd[4]) } if (action === 'i') { result.text = cmd.slice(4) } else if (action === 'r') { result.text = cmd.slice(6) } if (action === 'm') { result.newPos = parseInt(cmd[6]) } if (action === 'f') { result.search = cmd.slice(2) } return result } const command = window.generateRandomCommand(); version2(command);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
switch
if

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.

I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark defines two versions of a function: `version1` (switch statement) and `version2` (if-else statements). Both functions take a command string as input and perform various operations based on the first element of the array (`action`). The command string is generated randomly using the `window.generateRandomCommand()` function.

**What's being tested**

The benchmark tests two different approaches to handle the same set of commands:

1. **Switch statement (version1)**: This approach uses a switch statement to determine which action to perform based on the first element of the array (`action`). The cases are explicitly defined, and each case performs specific operations.
2. **If-else statements (version2)**: This approach uses if-else statements to determine which action to perform based on the value of `action`. Multiple conditions are chained together using logical operators.

**Options compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches:

1. Switch statement
2. If-else statements

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

* **Switch statement (version1)**:
	+ Pros:
		- More explicit and readable code.
		- Faster lookup times, as the browser can directly jump to the corresponding case.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires more code and maintenance effort due to the need for explicit cases.
		- May not be suitable for large numbers of possible actions.
* **If-else statements (version2)**:
	+ Pros:
		- Less code and maintenance effort required, as conditions can be chained together.
		- More flexible, as new conditions can be added without modifying existing code.
	+ Cons:
		- Slower lookup times, as the browser needs to execute multiple condition checks before reaching the correct case.

**Other considerations**

* **Performance**: The switch statement is generally faster than the if-else statements due to its faster lookup times. However, for large numbers of possible actions, the performance difference may become negligible.
* **Readability and maintainability**: The if-else statements are more concise and easier to understand, but the switch statement provides a clear and explicit structure.

**Library**

There is no specific library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, the `window.generateRandomCommand()` function is likely part of the JavaScript environment being tested.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None mentioned.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for handling different actions could include:

* **Array.prototype.reduce()**: This method can be used to accumulate results from each action.
* **Object-oriented programming (OOP)**: Objects and their methods can be used to encapsulate the logic for each action.
* **Finite State Machines (FSMs)**: FSMs can be used to model complex state-based logic.

However, these alternatives are not mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases.

Related benchmarks:

switch vs if in the case of a simple dml (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: switch vs if

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

switch

if

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):