Benchmark: templte tmpl vs underscore

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.4.1/underscore-min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/blueimp-tmpl@3.19.0/js/tmpl.min.js"></script>

<script type="text/template" id="template-underscore">
	Hello <%=obj.name%>
</script>
  
<script id="template-tmpl" type="text/x-tmpl">
   Hello {%=name%}
</script>

Tests:

vanilla + underscore
_.template(document.getElementById('template-underscore').innerHTML, {name: 'hello'});
tmpl
tmpl('template-tmpl', {name: 'hello'});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
vanilla + underscore
tmpl

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in the provided benchmark.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: using the Underscore.js library with its `template` function, and using BlueImp Template (tmpl) without any additional libraries. The test cases are designed to render a simple template string with a variable substitution.

**Template Engines**

There are two template engines being tested:

1. **Underscore.js**: A popular utility-first JavaScript library that provides various functional programming helpers and extensions. In this case, the `template` function is used to render a template string with a variable substitution.
2. **BlueImp Template (tmpl)**: A lightweight template engine that allows you to write HTML templates using a syntax similar to Handlebars or Mustache.

**Benchmark Options**

The benchmark compares two approaches:

1. **Vanilla + Underscore.js**: This approach uses the `template` function from Underscore.js to render the template string with variable substitution.
2. **tmpl**: This approach uses BlueImp Template (tmpl) without any additional libraries to render the template string with variable substitution.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Vanilla + Underscore.js**
	* Pros:
		+ Well-established library with a large user base.
		+ Provides various utility functions that can be useful in other contexts.
	* Cons:
		+ Adds overhead due to the need to load an additional library.
		+ May require more setup and configuration compared to the tmpl approach.
2. **tmpl**
	* Pros:
		+ Lightweight and easy to include in projects without adding unnecessary dependencies.
		+ Provides a simple and straightforward syntax for template rendering.
	* Cons:
		+ Less widely adopted than Underscore.js, which may limit its usefulness in some contexts.
		+ May require additional setup or configuration compared to the vanilla approach.

**Library and Purpose**

In this benchmark, both libraries are used for their respective purposes:

1. **Underscore.js**: The `template` function is used to render a template string with variable substitution.
2. **BlueImp Template (tmpl)**: The template engine is used to render an HTML template with variable substitution.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark, as both approaches use standard template rendering mechanisms.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative template engines or libraries, here are a few options:

1. **Handlebars.js**: A popular template engine that provides a more extensive set of features than tmpl.
2. **Mustache**: Another lightweight template engine that provides a simple and straightforward syntax for template rendering.
3. **Pug**: A templating language that compiles to JavaScript, providing a more efficient alternative to traditional template engines.

In summary, the benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: using Underscore.js with its `template` function, and using BlueImp Template (tmpl) without any additional libraries. The test cases are designed to render simple template strings with variable substitution, allowing users to compare the performance of these two approaches in a controlled environment.

Related benchmarks:

templte tmpl vs underscore (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: vanilla + underscore vs tmpl

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

vanilla + underscore

tmpl

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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