Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Finite vs Multiples Only
(version: 0)
I'm a dog with a bone.
Comparing performance of:
Finite - Test all numbers within limit vs Multiples Only
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var limit = 10; var total = 0;
Tests:
Finite - Test all numbers within limit
for (var i = 0; i < limit; i++) { if (i % 3 === 0 || i % 5 == 0) { total += i; } } console.log(total);
Multiples Only
console.log(total);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Finite - Test all numbers within limit
Multiples Only
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):
Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark. **Benchmark Overview** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark, where users can create and run tests to compare different approaches. The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of two test cases: "Finite" (testing all numbers within a limit) and "Multiples Only" (testing only multiples of 3 or 5). **Options Compared** The benchmark compares two options: 1. **Finite**: This approach iterates over all numbers within the specified limit (`var limit = 10;`) and checks if each number is divisible by either 3 or 5 using the modulo operator (`i % 3 === 0 || i % 5 == 0`). If the condition is true, the number is added to a running total (`total += i;`). 2. **Multiples Only**: This approach simply prints the running total at the end without any loop or conditional checks. **Pros and Cons** **Finite:** Pros: * More comprehensive testing of numbers within the limit * May be more representative of real-world scenarios where all numbers are considered Cons: * Slower execution due to loop overhead and conditional checks * May introduce unnecessary iterations for some cases (e.g., when `limit` is small) **Multiples Only:** Pros: * Faster execution due to minimal overhead and no loop or conditional checks * More efficient for testing only multiples of 3 or 5 Cons: * Less comprehensive testing, as only specific numbers are considered * May not be representative of real-world scenarios where all numbers are considered **Library Usage** There is no explicit library usage mentioned in the provided JSON. However, it's worth noting that some libraries might provide optimized implementations for the modulo operator or other mathematical functions used in the benchmark. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** The benchmark uses a feature called "var hoisting" (also known as variable declarations) to declare variables `limit` and `total`. In JavaScript, declared variables are moved to the top of their scope if they are not reassigned before use. This is done by adding the script preparation code (`var limit = 10; var total = 0;`) before the test cases. **Other Alternatives** If you wanted to rewrite this benchmark using a different approach, here are some alternatives: * Use a loop with `for...of` or `for...in` instead of traditional `for` loops. * Utilize Array.prototype.reduce() or other aggregation functions to simplify the iteration process. * Leverage modern JavaScript features like async/await, Promises, or Web Workers for more efficient execution. However, it's essential to keep in mind that rewriting a benchmark should focus on optimizing performance and readability rather than introducing unnecessary complexity.
Related benchmarks:
toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() vs Math.floorfast vs new Math.trunc vs numeraljs
+string vs Number vs parseInt
Math.Max() vs Ternary
Number vs + vs parseFloat + properties px
parseInt vs Number BigInts
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?