Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
String concat – `` vs concat
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
`` vs concat
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
``
let str = ''; str = `${str}str`;
concat
let str = ''; str = str.concat("str");
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
``
concat
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
3 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:148.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/148.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 148 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
``
1486604928.0 Ops/sec
concat
148583744.0 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks! **What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents two individual test cases: ```` (template literals) and `concat`. The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches for concatenating strings. **Options compared** Two options are being compared: 1. **Template literals (`"````)**: This approach uses template literals to concatenate strings. Template literals were introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). 2. **`concat()` method**: This is a built-in JavaScript method that concatenates two or more strings. **Pros and Cons of each approach:** 1. **Template literals (`"````)**: * Pros: + More readable and expressive, as it allows you to embed expressions inside string literals. + Less prone to errors, as the syntax is stricter than `concat()`. * Cons: + May incur a performance overhead due to the additional parsing steps required for template literals. 2. **`concat()` method**: + Pros: + Generally faster and more efficient, as it is implemented in native code and optimized for performance. * Cons: + Less readable and less expressive than template literals. **Library usage** There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided benchmark definition or test cases. However, some JavaScript engines (like V8) use internal libraries to implement features like template literals. **Special JS feature** Template literals are a special feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). They provide a more expressive and readable way to concatenate strings with embedded expressions. **Other alternatives** If you want to test alternative approaches, you could consider: 1. **String interpolation**: Some JavaScript engines support string interpolation using `str + str` or similar syntax. 2. **String concatenation using arrays**: You can also concatenate strings by creating an array of strings and joining them together using the `join()` method: `[str, 'str'].join('')`. 3. **Other string concatenation methods**: There are other ways to concatenate strings in JavaScript, such as using `+` operator or other libraries like Lodash. For a more comprehensive benchmark, you would need to include these alternatives and repeat the testing process for each approach.
Related benchmarks:
Javascript 'concat()' vs '+' for strings
Javascript 'concat()' vs '+' for strings
Javascript 'concat()' vs '+'
string_concat_vs_append
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?