Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
eval vs string
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
plain json vs eval
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<div id=''></div>
Script Preparation code:
data = JSON.stringify({ str : 'string', num : 0, arr : [1, 2, 3], bool : true, nil : null, }); dataEval = '{"str":"string","num":0,"arr":[1,2,3],"bool":true,"nil":null}';
Tests:
plain json
JSON.parse(data);
eval
eval('(' + dataEval + ')');
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
plain json
eval
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 break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to understand what is being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition represents a JavaScript code snippet that is executed repeatedly to measure its performance. In this case, there are two benchmark definitions: 1. `JSON.parse(data);` 2. `eval('(' + dataEval + ')');` These two definitions are compared in the individual test cases. **Options being compared** In the first benchmark definition, `JSON.parse(data);`, a string is parsed into a JavaScript object using the `JSON` method. In the second benchmark definition, `eval('(' + dataEval + ')');`, a string is evaluated as JavaScript code using the `eval()` function. **Pros and Cons of each approach** 1. **JSON.parse(data);** * Pros: + Faster execution time due to optimized parsing algorithm. + Less memory usage since it doesn't create a new scope or function call stack. * Cons: + Requires the input data to be a valid JSON string, which may not always be the case. 2. **eval('(' + dataEval + ')');** * Pros: + Can evaluate arbitrary JavaScript code, making it more flexible. * Cons: + Slower execution time due to the overhead of creating a new scope and function call stack. + More memory usage since it creates a new scope and function call stack. **Library: JSON** The `JSON` library is used in the first benchmark definition to parse the input string into a JavaScript object. The `JSON.parse()` method is a built-in JavaScript method that parses a JSON string into a JavaScript object. **Special JS feature or syntax (not applicable in this case)** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these benchmark definitions. Now, let's analyze the individual test cases: 1. **plain json** * This test case compares the execution time of parsing a JSON string using `JSON.parse(data);` to executing the same code using `eval('(' + dataEval + ')');`. 2. **eval** * This test case compares the execution time of evaluating a JavaScript string using `eval('(' + dataEval + ')');` to executing the same code using `JSON.parse(data);`. **Other alternatives** Some alternative approaches that could be used instead of `JSON.parse()` and `eval()` are: 1. **Parsing with a custom parser**: Instead of using the built-in `JSON.parse()` method, you could implement a custom parser to parse the JSON string. 2. **Using a different evaluation function**: You could use a different evaluation function, such as `Function(dataEval)` or `new Function(dataEval)`, instead of `eval('(' + dataEval + ')')`. However, these alternatives are not typically used in practice due to their potential performance overhead and complexity. I hope this explanation helps!
Related benchmarks:
JSON.parse() vs. eval()
json parse vs eval
json parse vs eval - version 2
JSON Stringify vs every
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?