Benchmark: Labels - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.7.11/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}

var values = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++){
  values.push(getRandomInt(10000));
}

Tests:

old
const result = []; for (let i = _.min(values); i <= _.max(values); i++) { result.push(i); } _.reverse(result);
new
const startValue = Math.min(...values); const endValue = Math.max(...values); const result = new Array(endValue - startValue); for (let value = endValue, index = 0; value >= startValue; value--, index++) { result[index] = value; } return result;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
old
new

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'd be happy to help you understand what's being tested in this benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two test cases, labeled as "old" and "new", which are designed to measure the performance difference between using Lodash's `min` and `max` functions versus using JavaScript's built-in `Math.min` and `Math.max` functions. The test case creates an array of 1000 random integers between 0 and 10,000, and then uses these functions to create a new array with the values in ascending order.

**Options compared**

There are two approaches being compared:

1. **Lodash's min and max functions**: The "old" test case uses Lodash's `min` and `max` functions to find the minimum and maximum values in the array, respectively.
2. **JavaScript's built-in Math.min and Math.max functions**: The "new" test case uses JavaScript's built-in `Math.min` and `Math.max` functions to achieve the same result.

**Pros and cons of each approach**

**Lodash's min and max functions**

Pros:

* Simplifies the code and makes it more concise
* Can be a good choice when working with large datasets or complex calculations

Cons:

* Requires an additional library to be included in the HTML file (in this case, Lodash)
* May have slower performance due to the overhead of calling a function and loading a library

**JavaScript's built-in Math.min and Math.max functions**

Pros:

* Fastest option, as it only requires arithmetic operations
* No additional libraries or overhead needed

Cons:

* Can be less readable and more verbose than using Lodash's functions
* May require more manual error handling (e.g., handling edge cases where the array is empty)

**Other considerations**

Both test cases use a similar approach to create the new array, which is efficient in terms of time complexity. However, JavaScript's built-in `Math.min` and `Math.max` functions may have a slight performance advantage due to their native implementation.

**Library: Lodash.js**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript library that provides a set of useful functions for working with arrays, objects, and other data structures. In this test case, Lodash's `min` and `max` functions are used to simplify the code and make it more concise. The library is included in the HTML file using a script tag.

**Special JS feature: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require additional explanation.

Related benchmarks:

Labels (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: old vs new

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

old

new

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):