Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Working with dates
(version: 0)
Testing going between different formats. First two are going to Dates, last two are for going to times. Each pair is functionally equivalent.
Comparing performance of:
new Date(string) vs new Date(time) vs Date.parse(string) vs new Date(string).getTime()
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
new Date(string)
new Date("2022-01-24T08:31:17.720Z");
new Date(time)
new Date(1643013077720);
Date.parse(string)
Date.parse("2022-01-24T08:31:17.720Z");
new Date(string).getTime()
new Date("2022-01-24T08:31:17.720Z").getTime();
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
new Date(string)
new Date(time)
Date.parse(string)
new Date(string).getTime()
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 break down what is being tested on the provided JSON and explain each option, its pros and cons, and other considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition defines a set of tests to measure the performance of different approaches for working with dates in JavaScript. There are four test cases: 1. `new Date(string)` 2. `new Date(time)` 3. `Date.parse(string)` 4. `new Date(string).getTime()` **Options compared** * **`new Date(string)`**: This option creates a new date object from a string representation of a date. The string can be in various formats, such as "YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS.SSSZ" or "YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS" (without the milliseconds). * **`new Date(time)`**: This option creates a new date object from a Unix timestamp (a number representing the number of seconds since January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 UTC). The `time` value is expected to be in milliseconds. * **`Date.parse(string)`**: This option parses a string representation of a date and returns the resulting timestamp. It can handle various formats, including the same ones used by `new Date(string)`. * **`new Date(string).getTime()`**: This option creates a new date object from a string representation of a date and then calls the `getTime()` method to get the timestamp. **Pros and Cons** * **`new Date(string)`**: Pros: easy to use, can handle various formats. Cons: may be slower due to parsing the string into a timestamp. * **`new Date(time)`**: Pros: fast, as it directly uses the Unix timestamp. Cons: requires the `time` value to be in milliseconds, which might not always be the case (e.g., if using milliseconds in the original date string). * **`Date.parse(string)`**: Pros: flexible format support, can handle various formats. Cons: may return incorrect results due to errors or invalid input. * **`new Date(string).getTime()`**: Pros: combines the benefits of `new Date(string)` and `new Date(time)`. Cons: adds an extra method call. **Library usage** None of the test cases explicitly use any libraries beyond the built-in JavaScript date functions. However, some browsers might use internal optimization or caching mechanisms that affect the benchmark results. **Special JS feature or syntax** There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in these tests. The focus is on the performance comparison of different date manipulation approaches. **Other alternatives** If you wanted to test other approaches, you could consider: * Using a separate library for date parsing and manipulation, such as Moment.js. * Implementing your own custom date parsing and manipulation functions. * Comparing the performance of different JavaScript engines (e.g., V8 vs. SpiderMonkey). Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark definition and test cases. If you'd like to modify or add more test cases, please let me know!
Related benchmarks:
Date clone test
Date() vs Date(YY,MM,DD,hh,mm)
Date comparison Date.now vs new Date
Intl.DateTimeFormat() vs Date().ISOString()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?