Benchmark: Location Formatting

Script Preparation code:

var FULL_CITY_STATE_ZIP = { city: "City", state: "State", zip: "123456" };

Tests:

Filter Join
function generateLocationStr({ city, state, zip}) { const isEmpty = (value) => !!value return [ city, [state, zip].filter(isEmpty).join(' ') ].filter(isEmpty).join(', '); } generateLocationStr(FULL_CITY_STATE_ZIP);
Template String
const generateLocationStr = ({ city, state, zip}) => { const leftSeparator = (city && state || zip) ? ',' : ''; const rightSeparator = (state && zip) ? ' ': ''; return `${city ? city : ''}{$leftSeparator}${state ? state : ''}${rightSeparator}${zip ? zip : ''}`; } generateLocationStr(FULL_CITY_STATE_ZIP);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Filter Join
Template String

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 dive into the provided benchmark data.

**Overview**

The provided JSON represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks, each measuring the performance of a different approach for formatting location strings. The benchmarks are designed to test the speed and efficiency of these approaches on various browsers and devices.

**Benchmark Definitions**

There are two benchmark definitions:

1. **Location Formatting**: This benchmark is used to compare two approaches for formatting location strings:
	* **Filter Join**: This approach uses the `filter()` method to remove empty values from an array, followed by joining the remaining values using the `join()` method.
	* **Template String**: This approach uses template literals (introduced in ECMAScript 2015) to format the location string. The syntax is as follows: `${property1 || ''}${separator}${property2 || ''}`.

**Library**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definitions. However, it's worth noting that the `filter()` method and template literals are built-in JavaScript features.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

Template literals (used in the "Filter Join" approach) were introduced in ECMAScript 2015. They allow you to embed expressions inside string literals using backticks (`). This feature is widely supported by modern browsers.

**Options Compared**

The two benchmark definitions compare the performance of:

1. **Filter Join**: Uses the `filter()` method and `join()` method to format the location string.
2. **Template String**: Uses template literals (introduced in ECMAScript 2015) to format the location string.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

**Filter Join**

Pros:

* Widely supported by older browsers
* Can be more readable for developers familiar with array manipulation

Cons:

* Requires explicit filtering and joining operations, which can be slower than template literals

**Template String**

Pros:

* More concise and expressive syntax
* Generally faster execution due to the optimized compilation process in modern browsers

Cons:

* Requires ECMAScript 2015 support, which might not be available on older browsers or devices.

**Other Considerations**

When interpreting benchmark results, it's essential to consider factors like:

* **Browser and device variations**: The provided benchmark data includes results from Chrome 103 on a desktop platform. This means that the performance differences between Filter Join and Template String may vary across different browsers and devices.
* **Code optimization**: The code snippets provided in the benchmark definitions are already optimized for performance. However, real-world scenarios might require additional optimizations, such as caching or memoization.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches or optimizing your own location string formatting code, consider the following:

1. **Use a library or framework**: Depending on your specific requirements, you might find libraries like Moment.js (for date and time manipulation) or Lodash (for utility functions) useful.
2. **Explore other template engines**: While template literals are widely supported, you might want to experiment with other template engines, such as Handlebars or Mustache.
3. **Consider caching or memoization**: If your location string formatting code is called frequently, consider implementing caching or memoization techniques to improve performance.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach ultimately depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and target audience.

Related benchmarks:

Location Formatting (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Filter Join vs Template String

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Filter Join

Template String

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):