Benchmark: benchmark-16666 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="module">
    import dayjs from "https://cdn.skypack.dev/dayjs@1.10.7"
    import * as luxon from "https://cdn.skypack.dev/luxon@2.3.0"
    import { parseISO } from "https://cdn.skypack.dev/date-fns@v2.28.0"
    import moment from "https://cdn.skypack.dev/moment@2.29.1"
    window.dayjs = dayjs
    window.parseISO = parseISO
    window.moment = moment
    window.luxon = luxon
</script>

Script Preparation code:

window.ds = "2022-01-12T00:51:53.623839+00:00";

Tests:

datefns
parseISO(ds)
luxon
luxon.DateTime.fromISO(ds);
moment
moment(ds)
dayjs
dayjs(ds)
native
new Date(ds)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
datefns
luxon
moment
dayjs
native

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.

I'll break down the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is the core part of the measurement that defines what needs to be measured. In this case, it's a single function call that parses an ISO-formatted date string (`"2022-01-12T00:51:53.623839+00:00"`). The parsed value is not used anywhere in the benchmark; its purpose seems to be to test the parsing performance of different libraries.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code sets up the environment for the benchmark by importing various libraries and making them available as global variables:

* `dayjs` from Skypack
* `luxon` from Skypack
* `parseISO` from date-fns (a library for working with dates)
* `moment` from Skypack
* `luxon` from Skypack (again, possibly to ensure it's available under a different name)

**Individual Test Cases**

There are five individual test cases, each defining a different approach to parse the ISO-formatted date string:

1. **datefns**: `parseISO(ds)`
	* Pros: `datefns` is a popular and well-maintained library for working with dates in JavaScript.
	* Cons: The benchmark may be biased towards libraries that use this library, as it's being used extensively.
2. **luxon**: `luxon.DateTime.fromISO(ds)`
	* Pros: `luxon` is a modern and efficient library for working with dates and times in JavaScript.
	* Cons: The benchmark may favor libraries that rely on `luxon`, potentially overlooking more lightweight alternatives.
3. **moment**: `moment(ds)`
	* Pros: `moment` is a widely used library for working with dates and times in JavaScript, especially among developers who need to work with JSON data.
	* Cons: `moment.js` has security vulnerabilities and has been largely replaced by more modern libraries like luxon and date-fns.
4. **dayjs**: `dayjs(ds)`
	* Pros: `dayjs` is a lightweight alternative to `moment`, designed to be fast and efficient.
	* Cons: The benchmark may favor libraries that use `luxon` over `dayjs`.
5. **native**: `new Date(ds)`
	* Pros: Using the built-in `Date` constructor can be a lightweight and efficient approach, especially for simple date parsing tasks.
	* Cons: This method may not work correctly for all possible ISO-formatted date strings, as it relies on the client-side JavaScript engine to parse the date.

**Latest Benchmark Results**

The latest results show that:

* The `native` approach is the fastest (lowest execution time per second), followed by `luxon`.
* The `datefns` and `dayjs` approaches are relatively close in terms of execution speed.
* The `moment` approach is slower than the other four.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing a library for date parsing, consider factors like:

* Performance: How quickly does the library parse dates?
* Feature set: Does the library support the specific features you need (e.g., time zones, locale formatting)?
* Security: Are there any security vulnerabilities or potential issues with the library's usage?
* Ecosystem: Is the library widely adopted and well-supported by the community?

If you're looking for alternatives to `luxon` or `datefns`, consider:

* `dayjs`: A lightweight alternative that prioritizes performance.
* `moment-timezone`: A variant of `moment.js` that includes time zone support, but is still a legacy library due to security concerns.
* `ms-values`: A small library that provides simple date and time parsing functionality.

Ultimately, the choice of library depends on your specific requirements and priorities.

Related benchmarks:

benchmark-16666 (version: 7)

Comparing performance of: datefns vs luxon vs moment vs dayjs vs native

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

datefns

luxon

moment

dayjs

native

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):