Benchmark: toISOString and literalISO 2

Script Preparation code:

var date = new Date();

function toISOString(date) {
	return date.toISOString();
}

function toISOStringLiteral(date) {
 

  const d = date.getUTCDate();
  const m = date.getUTCMonth() + 1;
  const y = date.getUTCFullYear();
  const hh = date.getUTCHours();
  const mm = date.getUTCMinutes();
  const ss = date.getUTCSeconds();
  const mss = date.getUTCMilliseconds();

  const ds = d <= 9 ? `0${d}` : `${d}`;
  const ms = m <= 9 ? `0${m}` : `${m}`;

  const hhs = hh <= 9 ? `0${hh}` : `${hh}`;
  const mms = mm <= 9 ? `0${mm}` : `${mm}`;
  const sss = ss <= 9 ? `0${ss}` : `${ss}`;
  let msss = mss <= 9 ? `0${mss}` : `${mss}`;
  msss = mss <= 99 ? `0${msss}` : msss;

  return `${y}-${ms}-${ds}T${hhs}:${mms}:${sss}.${msss}Z`;
};

function concat(date) {
 	var d = date.getUTCDate();
	var m = date.getUTCMonth() + 1;
	var y = date.getUTCFullYear();
  	var hh = date.getUTCHours();
 	var mm = date.getUTCMinutes();
  	var ss = date.getUTCSeconds();
  	var ms = date.getUTCMilliseconds();
  	var day = d <= 9 ? '0' + d : '' + d;
    var month = m <= 9 ? '0' + m : '' + m;
    var year = '' + y;
  
  	hh = hh <= 9 ? '0' + hh : '' + hh;
    mm = mm <= 9 ? '0' + mm : '' + mm;
    ss = ss <= 9 ? '0' + ss : '' + ss;
    ms = ms <= 9 ? '0' + ms : '' + ms;
    ms = ms <= 99 ? '0' + ms : '' + ms;
  
	return year + '-' + month + '-' + day + 'T' + hh + ':' + mm + ':' + ss + '.' + ms + 'Z';
}

Tests:

toISOString
for (var i=0; i<1000; ++i) { toISOString(date); }
concat
for (var i=0; i<1000; ++i) { concat(date); }
toISOStringLiteral
for (var i=0; i<1000; ++i) { toISOStringLiteral(date); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
toISOString
concat
toISOStringLiteral

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 benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of two functions: `toISOString` and `concat`, which are used to convert a JavaScript Date object to a specific string format. The benchmark also includes an intermediate function called `toISOStringLiteral`.

**Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. `toISOString`: This test case calls the `toISOString` function 1000 times in a loop.
2. `concat`: This test case calls the `concat` function 1000 times in a loop.
3. `toISOStringLiteral`: This test case calls the `toISOStringLiteral` function 1000 times in a loop.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of three different approaches:

1. **Native JavaScript**: The native JavaScript approach uses the built-in `toISOString` and `concat` functions to convert the Date object to string.
2. **Custom Implementation (`toISOStringLiteral`)**: The custom implementation, `toISOStringLiteral`, is a hand-crafted function that manually formats the Date object into the desired string format.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Native JavaScript**:
	+ Pros:
		- Optimized for performance by the JavaScript engine
		- Built-in functions are usually faster than custom implementations
	+ Cons:
		- Less control over formatting options
		- May have limitations or quirks due to browser/JavaScript engine variations
* **Custom Implementation (`toISOStringLiteral`)**:
	+ Pros:
		- More control over formatting options
		- Can be optimized for specific use cases or requirements
	+ Cons:
		- Requires manual implementation and debugging
		- May be slower than native JavaScript due to overhead of custom code

**Library**

The `toISOStringLiteral` function uses a library called `moment.js`. Moment.js is a popular date formatting library that provides a way to format dates in various formats, including the specific format used in this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's standard for JavaScript. However, it does rely on the browser's `Date` object and its built-in methods (like `toISOString`, `getUTCDate`, etc.) to perform the date formatting.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches or libraries for date formatting in JavaScript, some options include:

* Using a different date formatting library like `date-fns` or `dayjs`
* Implementing custom date formatting using only built-in JavaScript methods (although this may be less efficient)
* Using WebAssembly or other low-level optimization techniques to improve performance

Related benchmarks:

toISOString and literalISO 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: toISOString vs concat vs toISOStringLiteral

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

toISOString

concat

toISOStringLiteral

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):