Benchmark: moment vs datefns format f

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/date-fns/1.29.0/date_fns.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.rawgit.com/moment/moment/2.7.0/moment.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.rawgit.com/moment/moment-timezone/0.2.2/builds/moment-timezone-with-data.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var date = new Date()

Tests:

moment
moment(date.valueOf()).format("YYYY-MM-DD")
datefns
dateFns.format(date, 'YYYY-MM-DD')
date
date.getYear()+"-"+date.getMonth()+"-"+date.getDate()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
moment
datefns
date

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.

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

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three date formatting libraries: Moment.js, DateFns, and native JavaScript's `date` object.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code includes links to the required libraries:

1. Moment.js (version 2.7.0): A popular JavaScript library for working with dates.
2. DateFns (version 1.29.0): A lightweight JavaScript library for date and time utilities.
3. Moment-timezone-with-data (version 0.2.2): An extension of Moment.js that includes timezone data.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of three test cases:

1. **Moment**: `moment(date.valueOf()).format("YYYY-MM-DD")`
This test case uses the `moment` function from Moment.js to format a date string.
2. **DateFns**: `dateFns.format(date, 'YYYY-MM-DD')`
This test case uses the `format` function from DateFns to format a date object.
3. **Native JavaScript's date object**: `date.getYear()+\"-\"+date.getMonth()+\"-\"+date.getDate()`
This test case uses the native JavaScript `date` object to format a date string.

**Comparison**

The benchmark compares the performance of each test case, which is measured in executions per second.

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **Moment.js**: Pros:
	* Well-established library with a large user base.
	* Provides a wide range of features for working with dates.
Cons:
	* Can be bulky and slow due to its extensive feature set.
2. **DateFns**: Pros:
	* Lightweight and fast compared to Moment.js.
	* Simplifies date formatting and manipulation.
Cons:
	* Smaller user base compared to Moment.js.
3. **Native JavaScript's date object**: Pros:
	* Fastest option due to being a built-in implementation.
	* Simple and lightweight.
Cons:
	* Limited functionality compared to Moment.js and DateFns.

**Considerations:**

* The benchmark only measures the performance of date formatting, so it may not accurately represent the overall performance characteristics of each library.
* The test cases use different input formats (e.g., `date.valueOf()` vs. `getYear()+\"-\"+date.getMonth()+\"-\"+date.getDate()`), which can affect the results.

**Alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternative libraries, consider:

1. Luxon (formerly known as Moment.js): A modern, lightweight alternative to Moment.js.
2. jsDate: A small, lightweight library for date and time manipulation.
3. dayjs: A fast and feature-rich library that's similar to Moment.js.

Keep in mind that the choice of library ultimately depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

moment vs datefns format f (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: moment vs datefns vs date

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

moment

datefns

date

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):