A proper test would do this on a few hundred million elements interrupted every 16.6ms with a RAF so as to give the GC a chance to run and run about 30 seconds so as to trigger at least a couple GC cycles.
On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 10:49 AM, T.J. Crowder < [email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Florian Bösch <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Improve performance > > > > I doubt that this sequence of calls: > > > > min = Math.min(min, value) > > max = Math.max(max, value) > > > > > > Is slower than this: > > > > [min,max] = Math.minmax([min,max,value]) > > > > Because while the former can get inlined by JIT, the latter can't, > > and on top, it allocates 2 objects which then have to be GC'ed. > > I was going to make that very point, backed by a jsPerf, but the jsPerf > doesn't back it up: https://jsperf.com/two-calls-vs-one-returning-array > It says the minmax is faster on a 10-entry array (it reports the separate > calls as 46-48% slower on V8 and SpiderMonkey). > > Now, that's comparing making calls to functions defined in userland, not > ones provided by the engine, so that's an important difference. And there's > basically no memory pressure, whereas in real life there may be. And it's a > synthetic benchmark. But there we are. > > -- T.J. Crowder > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
