Benchmark: IP to number performance

Script Preparation code:

function ip2num1(ip){
	var octets = ip.split('.').map(o=>+o);
	return (octets[3]) | (octets[2]<<8) | (octets[1]<<16) | (octets[0] << 24);
}

function ip2num2(ip){
	var octets = ip.split('.').reverse();
	var num = 0;
	while(o = octets.pop()){
		num *= 256;
		num += +o;
	}
	return num;
}

var testIps = Array(1000).fill(0).map(()=>Array(4).fill(0).map(n=>Math.floor(Math.random()*256).toString()).join('.'))

Tests:

Function 1
var result1 = testIps.map(ip2num1);
Function 2
var result1 = testIps.map(ip2num2);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Function 1
Function 2

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 llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition Json**

The benchmark defines two functions, `ip2num1` and `ip2num2`, which are used to convert an IP address (a string of four numbers separated by dots) into a 32-bit integer. The conversion is done differently between the two functions.

**Function 1: ip2num1**
```javascript
function ip2num1(ip){
    var octets = ip.split('.').map(o=>+o);
    return (octets[3]) | (octets[2]<<8) | (octets[1]<<16) | (octets[0] << 24);
}
```
This function splits the IP address into four parts, converts each part to an integer using `+`, and then performs a bitwise OR operation to combine them into a single 32-bit integer.

**Function 2: ip2num2**
```javascript
function ip2num2(ip){
    var octets = ip.split('.').reverse();
    var num = 0;
    while(o = octets.pop()){
        num *= 256;
        num += +o;
    }
    return num;
}
```
This function splits the IP address into four parts, reverses their order using `reverse()`, and then iterates through the reversed array to calculate the integer value. The multiplication by 256 is used to shift the bits correctly.

**Comparison**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two functions, which are essentially implementing different ways of converting an IP address to a 32-bit integer.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Function 1 (ip2num1)**
	+ Pros: Simple and straightforward implementation.
	+ Cons: May lead to incorrect results due to the order of operations, as the bitwise OR operation is performed before shifting the bits correctly.
* **Function 2 (ip2num2)**
	+ Pros: Correctly shifts the bits using multiplication by 256, which ensures accurate results.
	+ Cons: More complex implementation with an additional loop and array reversal.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses `Array.prototype.map()` to apply both functions to a large dataset of randomly generated IP addresses (1000 x 4 octets each).
* The test case does not specify the JavaScript engine or platform used for the execution.
* No input validation is performed on the IP addresses, which may lead to incorrect results if the input is malformed.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There are no libraries explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, `Array.prototype.map()` is a standard JavaScript method that is widely supported across different browsers and engines.

No special JavaScript features or syntax are being tested in this benchmark. The focus is solely on the performance comparison of two simple functions implementing IP address conversion.

Related benchmarks:

IP to number performance (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Function 1 vs Function 2

Created: 9 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Function 1

Function 2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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