Benchmark: yaml 1.10.2 vs js-yaml 4.0.0

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="module">
import jsyaml from 'https://cdn.skypack.dev/js-yaml@4.0.0'
import YAML from 'https://cdn.skypack.dev/yaml@1.10.2'
window.jsyaml = jsyaml
window.YAML = YAML
</script>

Script Preparation code:

var yamlString = 'key1: val1\nkey2: 7';

Tests:

js-yaml
var dummy = jsyaml.load(yamlString);
yaml
var dummy = YAML.parse(yamlString);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
js-yaml
yaml

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:150.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/150.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 150 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

js-yaml

790K/s

yaml

109K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ js-yaml	789,630 Ops/sec
yaml	109,428 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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two YAML parsing libraries: `js-yaml` (version 4.0.0) and `YAML` (version 1.10.2). The test case measures the performance of each library when loading a predefined YAML string.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **js-yaml**: A JavaScript implementation of YAML parsing, specifically designed for Node.js.
2. **YAML**: A pure JavaScript implementation of YAML parsing, likely intended to be used in browser environments.

**Pros and Cons**

* **js-yaml**:
	+ Pros: Optimized for performance, well-tested, and widely adopted.
	+ Cons: Limited to Node.js environments; may not work seamlessly in browser environments due to differences in syntax and implementation details.
* **YAML**:
	+ Pros: Pure JavaScript implementation, potentially better suited for browser environments due to its simplicity and flexibility.
	+ Cons: May be slower than `js-yaml` due to its lack of optimization for performance.

**Library Purpose**

In this benchmark, both libraries are used to load a predefined YAML string (`yamlString`) into variables. The main difference lies in the implementation details:

* **js-yaml**: Uses its own parser and data structures to parse the YAML string.
* **YAML**: Uses the built-in `parse()` method of the `YAML` class to parse the YAML string.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript syntax and does not employ any experimental features or syntaxes.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative YAML parsing libraries, consider:

* **js2yaml**: A JavaScript library that converts JSON to YAML.
* **yamllint**: A command-line tool that checks the formatting of YAML files.

yaml 1.10.2 vs js-yaml 4.0.0 (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `js-yaml vs yaml`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

js-yaml

yaml

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

yaml 1.10.2 vs js-yaml 4.0.0 (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: js-yaml vs yaml

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

js-yaml

yaml

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: `js-yaml vs yaml`