Benchmark: 1+2+4 vs 1|2|4 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

a=0;

Tests:

1+2
a=1+2;
1|2
a=1|2;
1+2+4+8
a=1+2+4+8;
1|2|4|8
a=1|2|4|8;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1+2
1\|2
1+2+4+8
1\|2\|4\|8

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/50.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 50 on Windows XP

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
1+2	2491465.5 Ops/sec
1\|2	2484188.2 Ops/sec
1+2+4+8	2528287.8 Ops/sec
1\|2\|4\|8	2529099.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**What is tested on the provided JSON?**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two ways of executing arithmetic expressions in JavaScript:

1. Using pipes (`|`) to separate operands (e.g., `1|2`).
2. Using addition operators (`+`) to concatenate operands (e.g., `1+2`).

**Options compared:**

There are four test cases with different combinations of these two approaches:

* `1+2`: Using parentheses and addition.
* `1|2`: Using pipes.
* `1+2+4+8`: Using parentheses and addition.
* `1|2|4|8`: Using pipes.

**Pros and Cons:**

The choice between using pipes and addition operators affects the performance of arithmetic expressions. Here's a brief analysis:

Using pipes (`|`):

Pros:

* Can be more concise and easier to read, especially for simple expressions.
* May lead to faster execution since it avoids the overhead of function calls.

Cons:

* Requires JavaScript engines to support pipe syntax, which may not be the case in older browsers or versions.
* Can lead to slower performance if the engine needs to parse and execute the expression more frequently.

Using addition operators (`+`):

Pros:

* Widely supported across modern browsers and JavaScript engines.
* May be faster since it's a more common and familiar syntax.

Cons:

* Can make expressions appear cluttered or harder to read, especially for complex calculations.
* May lead to slower performance due to the overhead of function calls.

**Library usage:**

None of the provided benchmarks use any external libraries. The expression evaluations are executed directly in the JavaScript engine.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in these benchmarks, apart from the pipe syntax for concatenating operands. This syntax is supported by most modern browsers and JavaScript engines, but it may not be recognized by older versions.

**Other alternatives:**

To compare the performance of arithmetic expressions, other approaches could include:

1. Using a loop to execute each operand separately.
2. Using a function call with multiple arguments to concatenate operands.
3. Implementing a custom parser or optimizer for the expression syntax.
4. Comparing the performance of different JavaScript engines or versions.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional complexity, overhead, or limitations, which could affect the accuracy and reliability of the benchmark results.

In summary, MeasureThat.net's benchmarks compare two common ways to execute arithmetic expressions in JavaScript: using pipes for concatenation and addition operators. The choice between these approaches affects performance, and understanding their pros and cons can help developers optimize their code for specific use cases.

Related benchmarks:

1+2+4 vs 1|2|4 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 1+2 vs 1|2 vs 1+2+4+8 vs 1|2|4|8

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

1+2

1|2

1+2+4+8

1|2|4|8

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):