Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
clamp with min max vs ternary multiple
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
min max below vs ternary below vs min max above vs ternary above vs min max within vs ternary within
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
min max below
Math.min(Math.max(150, 10), 100);
ternary below
10 < 100 ? 100 : (10 > 150 ? 150 : 10)
min max above
Math.min(Math.max(150, 200), 100);
ternary above
200 < 100 ? 100 : (200 > 150 ? 150 : 200)
min max within
Math.min(Math.max(150, 125), 100);
ternary within
125 < 100 ? 100 : (125 > 150 ? 150 : 125)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (6)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
min max below
ternary below
min max above
ternary above
min max within
ternary within
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
gemma2:9b
, generated one year ago):
This benchmark compares two ways to implement a simple clamping function in JavaScript: **Method 1: `Math.min()` and `Math.max()`:** * **Description:** This method uses the built-in `Math.min()` and `Math.max()` functions to find the minimum and maximum values among a set of numbers, effectively creating a range. The number is then clamped within this range. * **Example:** `Math.min(Math.max(150, 10), 100)` **Method 2: Ternary Operator (`? :`):** * **Description:** This method uses the ternary operator to create a concise conditional statement. It checks if a condition is true or false and returns one value if true, another if false. * **Example:** `10 < 100 ? 100 : (10 > 150 ? 150 : 10)` **Pros and Cons:** | Method | Pros | Cons | |---|---|---| | `Math.min()`, `Math.max()` | - More readable for beginners <br> - Can be more efficient in certain cases due to JavaScript engine optimizations | - Potentially less concise than the ternary operator | | Ternary Operator | - More concise and potentially more performant | - Less readable for some beginners | **Other Considerations:** * **Performance:** In most modern JavaScript environments, both methods are likely to perform similarly. The benchmark results on MeasureThat.net show that in this specific case, the ternary operator is slightly faster for certain scenarios. However, real-world performance can vary depending on factors like code complexity, compiler optimizations, and hardware. * **Readability:** The `Math.min()` and `Math.max()` approach might be more readable for beginners who are not yet familiar with the ternary operator. **Alternatives:** * Other libraries or frameworks may provide built-in clamping functions that handle edge cases and offer additional features. * For very specific use cases, you could write a custom function that is tailored to your exact requirements. Let me know if you have any other questions!
Related benchmarks:
Lodash clamp vs Math.min(Math.max) vs Bitwiseyrooneyh
Clamping via min-max or ternary operator
Clamp Integers by various methods
clamp with min max vs ternary
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?