Benchmark: 11111111 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

12341234

Script Preparation code:

var array = [1,2,3];

Tests:

2341234
var d = array[array.length - 1];
21341234
var z = array.at(-1);
1234234
var d2 = array[1];
123412344
var z2 = array.at(1);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
2341234
21341234
1234234
123412344

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/122.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 122 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
2341234	4433175.5 Ops/sec
21341234	8322617.0 Ops/sec
1234234	8362129.5 Ops/sec
123412344	8272000.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help explain the JavaScript microbenchmarking test case.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is represented by a JSON object that contains information about the test. In this case, it has four fields:

* `Name`: A unique identifier for the benchmark.
* `Description`: An optional field that provides a description of the benchmark (which is empty in this case).
* `Script Preparation Code`: A JavaScript code snippet that is executed before running the benchmark. This code initializes an array variable `array` with three elements: `[1, 2, 3]`.
* `Html Preparation Code`: An HTML code snippet that is executed before running the benchmark (this field contains a random string of numbers).

**Individual Test Cases**

The test cases are represented by an array of objects, each containing:

* `Benchmark Definition`: A JavaScript code snippet that defines a variable and uses it to access an element in the `array` variable.
* `Test Name`: A unique identifier for each test case.

In this case, there are four test cases:

1. `var d = array[array.length - 1];`: This test case uses the negative indexing feature (`-1`) to access the last element of the `array`.
2. `var z = array.at(-1);`: This test case uses the `at()` method with a negative index to access the last element of the `array`. The `at()` method is introduced in ECMAScript 2019 (ES10).
3. `var d2 = array[1];`: This test case uses direct indexing (`[]`) to access the second element of the `array`.
4. `var z2 = array.at(1);`: This test case uses the `at()` method with a positive index to access the second element of the `array`.

**Pros and Cons**

The choice of accessing an element in an array depends on various factors, including performance, readability, and maintainability.

* Direct indexing (`[]`): This approach is simple and easy to read, but it may be slower than using methods like `at()` or negative indexing.
* Negative indexing: Using negative indices can be more readable and efficient than direct indexing, especially for large arrays.
* `at()` method: The `at()` method provides a more explicit way of accessing elements in an array, but it requires support from modern browsers. Its performance may vary depending on the browser implementation.

**Library and Special JS Features**

The `at()` method is introduced in ECMAScript 2019 (ES10) and is supported by most modern browsers.

Other alternatives to direct indexing or negative indexing include using `slice()` or other array methods, but these approaches are often less efficient than accessing elements directly.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative ways to access elements in an array, consider the following:

* Using `Array.prototype.slice()`: This method creates a new array with a specified subset of elements from the original array.
* Using `Array.prototype.indexOf()` or `Array.prototype.lastIndexOf()`: These methods return the index of the first occurrence of a specified element in the array.

Related benchmarks:

11111111 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 2341234 vs 21341234 vs 1234234 vs 123412344

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

2341234

21341234

1234234

123412344

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):