Benchmark: slice vs substr vs substring (with end index)

Script Preparation code:

var example = 'there is no spoon'

Tests:

slice
var result = example.slice(0, 10)
substr
var result = example.substr(0,10)
substring
var result = example.substring(0, 10)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
slice
substr
substring

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 what's being tested in this benchmark.

**What is being tested:**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of three JavaScript string slicing methods:

1. `slice()`
2. `substr()`
3. `substring()` (with an optional end index)

These methods are used to extract a subset of characters from a string, starting from a specified index.

**Options compared:**

Each test case compares the performance of one of these three methods with a specific start index (in this case, 0).

Here's what's being tested:

* `slice(0, 10)` on "there is no spoon"
* `substr(0,10)` on "there is no spoon"
* `substring(0, 10)` on "there is no spoon"

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **`slice()`**: This method creates a new string object containing the specified range of characters from the original string. The pros are that it's efficient for creating new strings with fixed lengths. However, its performance can be slower compared to `substr()` because of the overhead of creating a new string.
2. **`substr()`**: This method returns a subset of the original string without creating a new object. It's faster than `slice()` but may be less readable or maintainable for some developers. The cons are that it can be less efficient for large strings, as it only returns a reference to the original string.
3. **`substring()`**: This method is similar to `substr()`, but it also takes an optional end index. If not provided (as in this benchmark), it behaves like `substr()`. The pros are that it's flexible and efficient for creating new strings with fixed lengths or extracting substrings. However, its performance can be affected by the presence of an end index.

**Other considerations:**

* **String concatenation**: The script preparation code uses string concatenation (`"there is no spoon"` + `example`), which may affect performance if done excessively.
* **Browser differences**: The benchmark results are specific to Chrome 100 on Windows Desktop. Browser and device platform variations may impact performance.

**Other alternatives:**

Some alternative approaches for slicing strings in JavaScript include:

1. Using the `Array.from()` method to create a new array from the string's characters, which can be more efficient than using string methods.
2. Utilizing libraries like Lodash or Underscore.js, which offer optimized string manipulation functions.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be relevant to this specific benchmark, as it focuses on comparing the performance of built-in string slicing methods (`slice()`, `substr()`, and `substring()`).

Related benchmarks:

slice vs substr vs substring (with end index) (version: 0)

Compares slice, substr and substring to each other when there is only a start index

Comparing performance of: slice vs substr vs substring

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

slice

substr

substring

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):