Benchmark: Card Art Name - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

Old
const parseConsumerDisplayName = (firstName, middleName, lastName) => { const fullName = [lastName, firstName, middleName] .filter(Boolean) .join(' ') .substr(0, 26); const givenNames = fullName.substring(lastName.length, fullName.length); return [givenNames, lastName].join(' '); }; parseConsumerDisplayName('Test', 'M', 'Name'); parseConsumerDisplayName('ReallyReallyLongFirstName', 'M', 'AbsurdlyLongLastName');
New
const parseConsumerDisplayName = (firstName, middleName, lastName) => { const lastNameLength = lastName.length; const givenNames = [firstName, middleName].filter(Boolean).join(' ').substr(0, 26-lastNameLength); return [givenNames, lastName].join(' '); }; parseConsumerDisplayName('Test', 'M', 'Name'); parseConsumerDisplayName('ReallyReallyLongFirstName', 'M', 'AbsurdlyLongLastName');

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.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark created on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark tests two different implementations of a function `parseConsumerDisplayName`, which takes three string parameters: `firstName`, `middleName`, and `lastName`. The goal is to determine which implementation is faster.

**Test Cases**

There are only two test cases:

1. **Old**: This implementation uses the original code provided in the benchmark definition, with no modifications.
```javascript
const parseConsumerDisplayName = (firstName, middleName, lastName) => {
  const fullName = [lastName, firstName, middleName]
    .filter(Boolean)
    .join(' ')
    .substr(0, 26);

const givenNames = fullName.substring(lastName.length, fullName.length);

return [givenNames, lastName].join(' ');
};
```
2. **New**: This implementation is a modified version of the original code, with changes to improve performance.
```javascript
const parseConsumerDisplayName = (firstName, middleName, lastName) => {
  const lastNameLength = lastName.length;
  const givenNames = [firstName, middleName]
    .filter(Boolean)
    .join(' ')
    .substr(0, 26 - lastNameLength);

return [givenNames, lastName].join(' ');
};
```
**Comparison of Options**

The two implementations differ in the way they calculate `givenNames`. The **Old** implementation uses a substring operation to extract `givenNames`, while the **New** implementation uses a different approach with a subtraction-based optimization.

Pros and Cons:

* **Old**:
	+ Pros: Simple and easy to understand.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the substring operation.
* **New**:
	+ Pros: Optimized for performance, potentially faster than the **Old** implementation.
	+ Cons: More complex code, which may make it harder to understand.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark uses a JavaScript engine (Chrome 85) and runs on a desktop platform with macOS 10.15.6. The `parseConsumerDisplayName` function is designed to extract the first name from a full name, taking into account middle names.

**Libraries and Special Features**

There are no libraries used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript engines or browsers may have specific optimizations or features that could affect the performance of this code (e.g., `const` propagation or `String.prototype.substr()` optimization).

**Alternatives**

If you wanted to write a similar benchmark, you could consider using other test frameworks like JSMbench or Benchmark.js. MeasureThat.net is specifically designed for JavaScript microbenchmarks, and its UI provides a convenient way to run and compare multiple tests.

In terms of alternatives for writing the `parseConsumerDisplayName` function itself, you could explore other approaches, such as:

* Using a more efficient algorithm for extracting first names from full names.
* Implementing a caching mechanism to store intermediate results.
* Utilizing parallel processing or concurrency to improve performance.

Related benchmarks:

Card Art Name (version: 0)

Old vs new implementation

Comparing performance of: Old vs New

Created: 5 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):