Benchmark: pi 180 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var pre = Math.PI / 180;

var calculationOneX;
var calculationOneY;

var calculationTwoX;
var calculationTwoY;

Tests:

precalc
calculationOneX = 100 + Math.cos(91 * pre) * 40; calculationOneY = 100 + Math.sin(91 * pre) * 40;
live
calculationTwoX = 100 + Math.cos(91 * (Math.PI / 180)) * 40; calculationTwoY = 100 + Math.sin(91 * (Math.PI / 180)) * 40;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
precalc
live

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 llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the details of this benchmark.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark measures the performance of JavaScript code that calculates points on a circle using different approaches to calculate the angle in radians.

**Options Compared**

There are two test cases:

1. **precalc**: This approach precalculates the value of `Math.PI / 180` and stores it in the variable `pre`. The angle is then calculated by multiplying `pre` with 91.
2. **live**: This approach calculates `Math.PI / 180` directly within the calculation, without storing it in a variable.

**Pros/Cons**

The precalc approach has several advantages:

* It avoids repeating the expensive calculation of `Math.PI / 180`, which is performed only once and stored in memory.
* The performance difference between precalc and live approaches can be significant due to the repeated calculations in the latter.

However, there are also some potential drawbacks to consider:

* If the value of `pre` changes (e.g., due to a bug or intentional modification), all dependent calculations would need to be updated accordingly, which might introduce complexity.
* In a scenario where memory is extremely limited, storing the precalculated value could consume precious resources.

**Library/Feature**

There is no external library used in this benchmark. The code only utilizes built-in JavaScript functions like `Math.PI` and `Math.cos()`/`Math.sin()`.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None are specifically mentioned in this case, but we do see some basic JavaScript syntax, such as variable declarations (`var`) and calculations using arithmetic operators.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to consider would be:

* Using a cached value of `Math.PI / 180` within the calculation (similar to precalc), but with additional mechanisms for handling potential changes or updates.
* Employing more advanced mathematical techniques, like trigonometric identities or optimized algorithms, specifically designed to minimize repeated calculations and improve performance.

Overall, this benchmark provides insights into the impact of precalculating constants on JavaScript performance, which can be valuable for developers working on computationally intensive applications.

Related benchmarks:

pi 180 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: precalc vs live

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

precalc

live

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):