Benchmark: rot13 test - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

FCC
// Solution with Regular expression and Array of ASCII character codes function rot13(str) { var rotCharArray = []; var regEx = /[A-Z]/ ; str = str.split(""); for (var x in str) { if (regEx.test(str[x])) { // A more general approach // possible because of modular arithmetic // and cyclic nature of rot13 transform rotCharArray.push((str[x].charCodeAt() - 65 + 13) % 26 + 65); } else { rotCharArray.push(str[x].charCodeAt()); } } str = String.fromCharCode.apply(String, rotCharArray); return str; } // Change the inputs below to test rot13("LBH QVQ VG!");
self
function rot13(str) { // LBH QVQ VG! var decode = []; var decodeString = ""; for (i = 0; i < str.length; i++) { decode.push(str.charCodeAt(i)); if (decode[i] >= 78 && decode[i] <= 90) { decode[i] = decode[i] - 13; } else if (decode[i] >= 65 && decode[i] < 78) { decode[i] = decode[i] + 13; } decodeString += String.fromCharCode(decode[i]); } return decodeString; } // Change the inputs below to test rot13("SERR PBQR PNZC");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
FCC
self

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 definitions and options compared, along with their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definitions**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **rot13 test with Regular Expression and Array of ASCII character codes**
```javascript
function rot13(str) {
  var rotCharArray = [];
  var regEx = /[A-Z]/;
  str = str.split("");
  for (var x in str) {
    if (regEx.test(str[x])) {
      // A more general approach
      // possible because of modular arithmetic
      // and cyclic nature of rot13 transform
      rotCharArray.push((str[x].charCodeAt() - 65 + 13) % 26 + 65);
    } else {
      rotCharArray.push(str[x].charCodeAt());
    }
  }
  str = String.fromCharCode.apply(String, rotCharArray);
  return str;
}
```
This implementation uses a regular expression to identify uppercase letters and applies the Caesar cipher rotation (shifting by 13 positions) using modular arithmetic.

2. **rot13 test with simple loop and charCodeAt**
```javascript
function rot13(str) {
  var decode = [];
  var decodeString = "";
  for (i = 0; i < str.length; i++) {
    decode.push(str.charCodeAt(i));
    if (decode[i] >= 78 && decode[i] <= 90) {
      decode[i] = decode[i] - 13;
    } else if (decode[i] >= 65 && decode[i] < 78) {
      decode[i] = decode[i] + 13;
    }
    decodeString += String.fromCharCode(decode[i]);
  }
  return decodeString;
}
```
This implementation uses a simple loop to iterate through the input string, pushing each character's ASCII code into an array. It then applies the Caesar cipher rotation using conditional statements.

**Options Compared**

The two implementations compare the following options:

* **Regular expression vs. simple loop**: Both methods can identify uppercase letters, but the regular expression approach is more concise and might be considered "more general" due to its modular arithmetic nature.
* **Array of ASCII character codes vs. individual charCodeAt calls**: The first implementation stores the results in an array, while the second uses a single call to `charCodeAt` per iteration.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Regular expression with Array of ASCII character codes**
	* Pros:
		+ More concise code
		+ Modular arithmetic approach might be considered more efficient due to its cyclic nature
	* Cons:
		+ Might be less readable for those unfamiliar with regular expressions
2. **Simple loop with charCodeAt**
	* Pros:
		+ Easier to understand and maintain, especially for those without experience with regular expressions
	* Cons:
		+ May be slightly slower due to the repeated `charCodeAt` calls

**Library: None**

There are no libraries explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definitions.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used beyond standard language constructs.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to optimize this code further, some alternative approaches could be:

* Using a lookup table for character codes instead of modular arithmetic
* Utilizing SIMD instructions (e.g., using `WebAssembly`) for faster execution on modern CPU architectures
* Implementing an iterative algorithm using bitwise operations or other tricks to reduce the number of operations

Keep in mind that these optimizations would require more extensive knowledge of low-level programming and performance optimization techniques.

The benchmark results provided show that the two implementations have different execution rates, with the "self" (simple loop) version being faster.

Related benchmarks:

rot13 test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: FCC vs self

Created: 9 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

FCC

self

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):