Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Try/catch performance w/o finally block (JSON parse)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Try/catch vs Without try/catch
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<div id="test"></div>
Tests:
Try/catch
try { JSON.parse('{"name":"John", "age":31, "city":"New York"}'); } catch(error) { console.log(error); }
Without try/catch
JSON.parse('{"name":"John", "age":31, "city":"New York"}');
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Try/catch
Without try/catch
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 years ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:121.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/121.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 121 on Ubuntu
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=496232" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
Without try/catch
2.1M/s
Try/catch
1.9M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
Without try/catch
2,087,448 Ops/sec
Try/catch
1,904,876 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**What is being tested?** The provided JSON represents two microbenchmarks for measuring the performance of JavaScript's `try`/`catch` block and `JSON.parse()` function. The first benchmark, "Try/catch performance w/o finally block (JSON parse)", tests the performance of a simple `try`/`catch` block with a single `JSON.parse()` call inside. The second benchmark, "Without try/catch", measures the performance of just the `JSON.parse()` call without any `try`/`catch` block. **Options being compared** The two benchmarks compare: 1. **Try/Catch vs Without Try/Catch**: This comparison tests whether using a `try`/`catch` block improves or hinders performance. 2. **No Finally Block**: Since the first benchmark doesn't have a `finally` block, we can assume that this test case is designed to verify if there's an impact on performance due to not having a `finally` clause. **Pros and Cons of each approach** * **Try/Catch with Finally**: Having a `try`/`catch` block with a `finally` clause can provide better error handling, but it might also add overhead due to the additional code execution. Pros: improved error handling; Cons: potential performance penalty. * **Try/Catch without Finally**: Without a `finally` block, the `try`/`catch` block is simpler and potentially faster. Pros: reduced overhead; Cons: may not provide better error handling. **Other considerations** * **Error Handling**: The first benchmark assumes that an error will be thrown by the `JSON.parse()` call. If no error is thrown, the `try`/`catch` block will not catch anything. * **Browser-specific behavior**: It's worth noting that some browsers may behave differently when it comes to handling errors in a `try`/`catch` block. **Library usage** In both benchmarks, `JSON.parse()` is used. This function is part of the JavaScript standard library and is used for parsing JSON data. **Special JS feature/syntax** There are no special features or syntaxes being tested here. The code is simple and straightforward. **Alternatives** Other alternatives to measure the performance of `try`/`catch` blocks and `JSON.parse()` function could include: * **Benchmarking with a specific error**: Instead of assuming an error will be thrown, you could use a different input that would throw an error, like a malformed JSON string. * **Benchmarking multiple browsers**: Running the benchmarks on multiple browsers to see how performance varies between them. * **Using a different JSON parsing library**: Using a third-party library like Lodash or UglifyJS to parse JSON data and compare performance.
Related benchmarks
Try/catch performance (JSON parse)
try catch json parse
Try/catch performance (JSON parse) fork
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?