Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
math operation vs condition
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
math vs condition
Created:
one year ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
math
const CaesarCipher = function (shift) { const code = (str, shift) => str.toUpperCase().replace(/[A-Z]/g, val => String.fromCharCode(65 + (val.charCodeAt() + shift - 65) % 26)); this.encode = str => code(str, shift); this.decode = str => code(str, 26 - shift); }; const c = new CaesarCipher(5); c.encode('Codewars') c.decode('HTIJBFWX')
condition
var CaesarCipher = function (shift) { this.shiftChar = (str, offset) => str.replace(/[a-z]/gi, (c) => { let charCode = c.toUpperCase().charCodeAt(0) + offset; if (charCode < 65) charCode += 26; else if (charCode > 90) charCode -= 26; return String.fromCharCode(charCode); }); this.encode = (str) => this.shiftChar(str, shift); this.decode = (str) => this.shiftChar(str, -shift); }; const c = new CaesarCipher(5); c.encode('Codewars') c.decode('HTIJBFWX')
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
math
condition
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/16.5 Safari/605.1.15
Browser/OS:
Safari 16 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=540482" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
condition
416K/s
math
412K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
condition
416,288 Ops/sec
math
411,995 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what is being tested. **Benchmark Definition**: The benchmark definition defines two test cases: "math operation vs condition" and its corresponding HTML preparation code. However, the actual JavaScript code for these tests is not provided in the JSON data. We'll assume that this code has been defined elsewhere. **Individual Test Cases**: There are two test cases: 1. **"math "**: This test case appears to be testing a mathematical operation (likely addition or substitution) within a Caesar Cipher encryption algorithm. * The `CaesarCipher` function is created with a shift value of 5, which means it will substitute each letter with the corresponding letter 5 positions ahead in the alphabet. * The `encode` method applies this shift to a given string, and the `decode` method applies the inverse shift (26 - shift) to another string. 2. **"condition"**: This test case appears to be testing a conditional statement within the Caesar Cipher algorithm. * The `shiftChar` function replaces each letter in the input string with its corresponding shifted character based on the offset value (in this case, 5). * However, if the character code is less than 65 (the ASCII value of 'A'), it adds 26 to the result. If the character code is greater than 90 (the ASCII value of 'Z'), it subtracts 26 from the result. * The `encode` and `decode` methods use this function with different offset values. **Library**: None, as these are custom implementations of the Caesar Cipher algorithm. **Special JS Features/Syntax**: There doesn't seem to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being used in these tests. However, the use of Unicode characters (e.g., `\r\n` and ` charCodeAt(0)` ) is consistent with modern JavaScript. **Other Alternatives**: To test similar mathematical operations, you might consider using a testing framework like Jest or Mocha to write unit tests for your own implementation of the Caesar Cipher algorithm. To test conditional statements, you could use a testing framework that supports mocking functions and variables, such as Jest's `jest.fn()` function. **Pros and Cons of Different Approaches:** 1. **Using the `CaesarCipher` class**: This approach allows for encapsulation of the encryption/decryption logic within an object, making it easier to reuse and extend. * Pros: Easy to use, flexible, and extensible. * Cons: May be less efficient due to object creation overhead. 2. **Using the `shiftChar` function directly**: This approach allows for direct access to the encryption/decryption logic without creating an object. * Pros: Efficient, easy to optimize, and doesn't require object creation. * Cons: Less flexible and reusable than the first approach. Ultimately, the choice between these approaches depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.
Related benchmarks
Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster?
If statements vs zero multiplication and assignment
Which equals operator (== vs ===) is faster2?
multiplication vs exponentiation
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?