Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Array split vs string substring ISO String
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Array.split vs Substring
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var s1 = "2021-01-01T01:01:01";
Tests:
Array.split
var n1 = s1.split("T")[0];
Substring
var n1 = s1.substring(0, 10);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Array.split
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):
Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is testing two approaches to extract a specific substring from a date string: `Array.split` and `Substring`. **What are we comparing?** We're comparing the performance of two different methods: 1. **Array.split**: This method splits the date string into an array using the `split()` method, and then takes the first element of the resulting array. 2. **Substring**: This method uses the `substring()` method to extract a specific substring from the date string. **Pros and Cons** Here's a brief overview of each approach: * **Array.split**: + Pros: Can be more efficient for certain use cases, as it avoids creating a new string object. + Cons: Requires creating an array, which can incur overhead. Additionally, if the split character is not present in the string, it will still create an empty array. * **Substring**: + Pros: Straightforward and easy to read. Avoids creating arrays or objects. + Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of creating a new string object. In general, `Array.split` can be more efficient when used correctly, but it may incur unnecessary overhead if the split character is not present in the string. On the other hand, `Substring` is simpler and easier to read, but may be slower due to the creation of a new string object. **Library** There isn't a specific library being tested here. The tests are using built-in JavaScript methods: `split()` and `substring()`. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** Neither approach uses any special JavaScript features or syntax. **Other Alternatives** If we were to test alternative approaches, some options could be: * Using regular expressions (e.g., `RegExp.test()`) instead of `Array.split` or `Substring`. * Using a library like Lodash's `string.prototype.split()` or `string.prototype.trimStart()` for more efficient string manipulation. * Testing different browsers' behavior using the same test cases. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The provided code sets up a date string variable `s1` and prepares it for testing. The HTML preparation code is empty, suggesting that this benchmark is purely focused on JavaScript performance. Overall, this benchmark provides a useful comparison between two common approaches to extracting substrings from strings in JavaScript.
Related benchmarks:
Array split vs string slice
ISO Date parsing split vs slice
Array split vs string substring for dates
Performance Test: substring vs substr vs slice vs split for date
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?