Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Floor test
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Math.floor vs ~~ Floor
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var floatNumber = 12.1234567;
Tests:
Math.floor
Math.floor(floatNumber)
~~ Floor
~~floatNumber
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Math.floor
~~ Floor
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmarking framework and test cases. **What is tested on the provided JSON?** The provided JSON represents two microbenchmarks: `Floor test`. The `Floor test` measures the performance of two different approaches to round down a floating-point number: 1. **Math.floor**: This is a built-in JavaScript function that returns the largest integer less than or equal to the input value. 2. **~~floatNumber**: This is a bitwise NOT operator (~) applied to the `floatNumber`. In JavaScript, the bitwise NOT operator performs a binary inversion of its operand. **Options compared** The two options being compared are: * Math.floor: a built-in function that uses arithmetic operations to round down the input value. * ~~floatNumber: a bitwise operation that inverts the bits of the float number and then converts it back to an integer, which effectively rounds down to the nearest whole number. **Pros and cons** * **Math.floor**: + Pros: Fast, well-optimized, and widely supported by most JavaScript engines. + Cons: May be slower for very large or very small input values due to the overhead of calling a function. * ~~floatNumber: + Pros: Inexpensive operation that doesn't require function calls, making it suitable for performance-critical code paths. + Cons: May not work correctly for negative numbers (it will return -1), and its behavior is not well-defined for edge cases. **Library** There are no libraries used in this benchmarking framework. **Special JS feature or syntax** None mentioned in the provided JSON. **Other alternatives** If you wanted to add more options to the benchmark, some alternative approaches could be: * Using a decimal arithmetic library like Decimal.js or Big.js * Employing a custom rounding algorithm using integer division or multiplication * Utilizing SIMD instructions (e.g., SSE/AVX) for parallelization Keep in mind that these alternatives might introduce additional complexity and may not always yield better performance results. **Benchmark preparation code** The provided JSON contains two scripts: 1. `var floatNumber = 12.1234567;` sets up a floating-point number value. 2. The `Html Preparation Code` is empty, which means no HTML-related setup is required for this benchmark. Individual test cases are defined in the array, with each object containing: * `Benchmark Definition`: The expression to be evaluated (e.g., `Math.floor(floatNumber)`). * `Test Name`: A descriptive name for the test case.
Related benchmarks:
toFixed(2) vs Math.floor method
Truncating a number to an integer
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() vs Math.floorfast vs new Math.trunc vs numeraljs
toFixed vs mathjs round
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?