Benchmark: Native JS: concatenate string with + vs template literals vs String.concat vs array join

Script Preparation code:

var name = "name";
var id = "id";

Tests:

using plus operator
for (let i = 0; i < 80; ++i) { let result = id + ": 1, " + name + ": someItem"; }
using concat function
for (let i = 0; i < 80; ++i) { let result = "".concat(id, ": 1, ", name, ": someItem"); }
using template literals
for (let i = 0; i < 80; ++i) { let result = `${id}: 1, ${name}: someItem`; }
using join
for (let i = 0; i < 80; ++i) { let result = [id, ": 1, ", name, ": someItem"].join(''); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
using plus operator
using concat function
using template literals
using join

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/142.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/142.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 142 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

using plus operator

135K/s

using template literals

131K/s

using concat function

100K/s

using join

75K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ using plus operator	135,053 Ops/sec
using template literals	131,332 Ops/sec
using concat function	100,498 Ops/sec
using join	75,241 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of four different methods to concatenate (join) strings in JavaScript:

1. Using the `+` operator
2. Using the `concat()` function
3. Using template literals (`${}`)
4. Using the `join()` method on an array

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition is a simple JSON object that describes the test:

* `"Name"`: The name of the benchmark, which includes a description.
* `"Description"`: A brief description of the test, which is not provided in this case.
* `"Script Preparation Code"`: A snippet of JavaScript code that prepares the variables `name` and `id`, which are used in the test cases.
* `"Html Preparation Code"`: An empty string, indicating that no HTML preparation is required.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark defines four test cases, each with a unique definition:

1. **Using plus operator**: The test case uses the `+` operator to concatenate two strings, one containing the `id` variable and another containing a fixed string.
2. **Using concat function**: The test case uses the `concat()` function to concatenate three strings: `id`, a fixed string, and another string.
3. **Using template literals**: The test case uses template literals (`${}`) to concatenate two variables, `name` and `id`.
4. **Using join**: The test case uses the `join()` method on an array containing four elements: `id`, a fixed string, and another string.

**Library Used**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's likely that the Chrome browser's JavaScript engine is using its built-in optimization techniques to compare these different approaches.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The only special feature used in this benchmark is template literals (`${}`), which was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). Template literals provide a concise way to create string literals with embedded expressions.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Using plus operator**: Pros: Simple, widely supported. Cons: Can lead to performance issues due to unnecessary allocations.
2. **Using concat function**: Pros: More readable than using `+` operator. Cons: Can be slower than other approaches due to the need for an intermediate allocation.
3. **Using template literals**: Pros: Concise and expressive. Cons: May not work well with older browsers or JavaScript engines that don't support template literals.
4. **Using join**: Pros: Fast and efficient, as it avoids allocations. Cons: Less readable than other approaches.

**Other Alternatives**

There are several other ways to concatenate strings in JavaScript, such as using the `+` operator with string concatenation (e.g., `"name" + ": 1, " + name + ": someItem"`), or using a library like Lodash's `join()` function. However, these approaches may not be optimized for performance and may have different trade-offs in terms of readability and maintainability.

Overall, the benchmark is designed to compare the performance of four common string concatenation methods, providing insights into which approach is best suited for specific use cases.

Native JS: concatenate string with + vs template literals vs String.concat vs array join (version: 0)

find best solution for concatenate 4 strings

Comparing performance of: `using plus operator vs using concat function vs using template literals vs using join`

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

using plus operator

using concat function

using template literals

using join

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Native JS: concatenate string with + vs template literals vs String.concat vs array join (version: 0)

find best solution for concatenate 4 strings

Comparing performance of: using plus operator vs using concat function vs using template literals vs using join

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

using plus operator

using concat function

using template literals

using join

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `using plus operator vs using concat function vs using template literals vs using join`