Benchmark: string trim - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var val = ' d  ';
var proto = ' '.__proto__.trim;
var curried = function(value) {return value.trim()};

Tests:

prototype
proto(val);
curried
curried(val);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
prototype
curried

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 world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test for the `trim()` function, which is a method used to remove whitespace from a string. The test has two variations: one using prototype inheritance (`proto`) and another using currying (`curried`).

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared in this benchmark:

1. **Prototype Inheritance (Proto)**: This approach creates an object that inherits the `trim()` method from the `__proto__` object of the string. The `proto` function takes a value as an argument and returns a new function that calls `trim()` on the original value.
2. **Currying (Curried)**: This approach creates a new function that takes a single argument, `value`, which is then trimmed using the `trim()` method.

**Pros and Cons**

Both approaches have their pros and cons:

* **Prototype Inheritance (Proto)**
	+ Pros:
		- More concise code
		- Can be more efficient since it avoids the overhead of creating a new function object
	+ Cons:
		- May not work as expected in certain environments (e.g., older browsers)
		- Can lead to unexpected behavior if not used carefully
* **Currying (Curried)**
	+ Pros:
		- More predictable and easier to reason about
		- Works in most environments without issues
	+ Cons:
		- Requires more code than the prototype approach
		- May be slower due to the overhead of creating a new function object

**Library and Purpose**

There is no specific library mentioned in the provided JSON. However, it's worth noting that `__proto__` is a built-in JavaScript property that provides access to the object's prototype chain.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The provided JSON does not mention any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) features.

**Other Considerations**

When working with microbenchmarks, it's essential to consider factors like:

* **Environment**: Different environments may have varying levels of support for certain JavaScript features.
* **Code Optimization**: Minimizing code size and complexity can lead to better performance in some cases.
* **Test Scope**: Microbenchmarks should focus on specific use cases or functions to ensure accurate results.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for testing string trimming functions might include:

1. **String.prototype.trim()**: Using the built-in `trim()` method as a comparison benchmark.
2. **Regular Expressions (Regex)**: Implementing a custom regex-based solution for trimming strings.
3. **DOM String Manipulation**: Using DOM APIs to manipulate and trim strings.

These alternatives can provide additional insights into string trimming performance, but they may introduce more complexity or specific dependencies compared to the prototype and curried approaches.

Related benchmarks:

string trim (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: prototype vs curried

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

prototype

curried

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):