Benchmark: fizzBuzzTes - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

fizz1
var fizzBuzz = n => [...Array(n)].reduce((acum, value, index) => { const currentNum = index + 1; let num = currentNum; if (currentNum % 5 == 0) num = currentNum % 3 == 0 ? "FizzBuzz" : "Buzz"; if (currentNum % 3 == 0 && num !== "FizzBuzz") num = "Fizz"; acum.push(num.toString()); return acum; }, []);
fizz2
var fizzBuzz = function(n) { let arr = []; for (let i = 1; i <= n; i++) { if (i % 3 === 0 && i % 5 !== 0) { arr.push('Fizz'); } else if (i % 5 === 0 && i % 3 !== 0) { arr.push('Buzz'); } else if ((i % 3 === 0) && (i % 5 === 0)) { arr.push('FizzBuzz'); } else { arr.push(''+i+''); } } return arr; };

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
fizz1
fizz2

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 world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents two test cases, `fizz1` and `fizz2`, which are variations of the classic FizzBuzz algorithm. The goal is to compare the execution speed (measured in executions per second) of these two implementations on a specific browser version (Safari 14).

**What's being tested?**

The FizzBuzz algorithm is a simple program that prints numbers from 1 to `n` with some additional logic:

* If the number is divisible by both 3 and 5, print "FizzBuzz".
* If the number is divisible by 3 but not 5, print "Fizz".
* If the number is divisible by 5 but not 3, print "Buzz".
* Otherwise, just print the number.

**Test Case 1: `fizz1`**

This test case uses an arrow function (`n =>`) to define a `fizzBuzz` function. The implementation uses `Array.prototype.reduce()` to iterate over an array of numbers from 1 to `n`, and accumulates the results in an array.

Here's the relevant code snippet:
```javascript
var fizzBuzz = n =>
  [...Array(n)].reduce((acum, value, index) => {
    const currentNum = index + 1;
    let num = currentNum;
    // ...
```
**Test Case 2: `fizz2`**

This test case uses a traditional function (`function (n) { ... }`) to define a `fizzBuzz` function. The implementation uses a `for` loop to iterate over numbers from 1 to `n`, and accumulates the results in an array.

Here's the relevant code snippet:
```javascript
var fizzBuzz = function(n) {
  let arr = [];
  for (let i = 1; i <= n; i++) {
    // ...
```
**Library/Feature Used**

No specific libraries are used in these test cases. However, `Array.prototype.reduce()` is a built-in JavaScript method that's being used in `fizz1`.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

No special features or syntax are used in these test cases.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

Both implementations achieve the same result (printing numbers from 1 to `n` with additional logic). However, there are differences in approach:

* `fizz1` uses a more concise arrow function expression.
* `fizz2` uses a traditional function definition and a `for` loop.

The choice between these approaches depends on personal preference, coding style, or specific requirements. In terms of performance, the results (382435936.0 vs 356236544.0 executions per second) suggest that `fizz1` is slightly faster than `fizz2`.

**Other Alternatives**

There are other ways to implement FizzBuzz, such as:

* Using a simple loop without accumulators (`for (let i = 1; i <= n; i++) { /* logic */ }`)
* Utilizing more advanced techniques like memoization or parallel processing

These alternatives might have different performance characteristics and trade-offs.

Related benchmarks:

fizzBuzzTes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: fizz1 vs fizz2

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

fizz1

fizz2

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):