Benchmark: Template Literal Vs Array Join

Script Preparation code:

var str = "Hello World"
var newStr = "Goodbye"
var start = 5

Tests:

template literal
const foo = `${str}-${newStr}-${start}`
Array Join
const bar = [str,newStr,start].join('-')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
template literal
Array Join

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
template literal	48016228.0 Ops/sec
Array Join	20274866.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark is named "Template Literal Vs Array Join". This suggests that we're comparing two different approaches for concatenating strings in JavaScript:

1. **Template Literals**: A template literal is a new way of formatting strings in JavaScript, introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It allows you to embed expressions inside string literals using backticks (`).
2. **Array Join**: This approach involves creating an array of strings and then joining them together using the `join()` method.

**Options Compared**
The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches:

* Template Literals
* Array Join

**Pros and Cons**

* **Template Literals**:
	+ Pros: More readable, concise, and expressive code. Can handle complex string formatting.
	+ Cons: May have slower performance compared to array join for very large strings or arrays.
* **Array Join**:
	+ Pros: Can be faster than template literals for very large strings or arrays. Can also be used when you need more control over the string concatenation process.
	+ Cons: Less readable and may lead to harder-to-debug code.

**Library**
None of the test cases explicitly use a library, but it's worth noting that JavaScript engines like V8 (used by Chrome) have optimized various string manipulation functions, including template literals and array join.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**
Template literals use a special syntax with backticks (`) and expressions inside. This feature is relatively new to JavaScript and can be beneficial for complex string formatting tasks.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**
The script preparation code includes variables `str`, `newStr`, and `start` which are used in the benchmark tests:

* `var str = "Hello World"`;
* `var newStr = "Goodbye"`;
* `var start = 5`;

These variables represent the input strings and a constant that will be concatenated with them.

**Individual Test Cases**
The benchmark has two test cases, each comparing one of the two approaches:

1. **Template Literal**: This test case creates a template literal using the `${}` syntax to concatenate the three variables into a single string.
2. **Array Join**: This test case uses an array `[]` to store the input strings and then joins them together using the `join()` method.

**Other Alternatives**
If you need alternative approaches for concatenating strings, some other options include:

* Using the `+` operator (e.g., `str + newStr + start`)
* Using the `concat()` method (e.g., `[str, newStr, start].concat()`)
* Using a library like Lodash's `templateLiteral` function

However, these alternatives are not being tested in this specific benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Template Literal Vs Array Join (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: template literal vs Array Join

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

template literal

Array Join

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):