Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
isApplicationJsonSplit vs isApplicationJsonIncludes
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
isApplicationJsonSplit vs isApplicationJsonIncludes
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var header = "application/json; utf-8"; var isApplicationJsonSplit = (text) => text !== undefined && text .split(";") .map((str) => str.trim()) .some((str) => str === "application/json"); var isApplicationJsonIncludes = (text) => text !== undefined && text.includes('application/json');
Tests:
isApplicationJsonSplit
isApplicationJsonSplit(header);
isApplicationJsonIncludes
isApplicationJsonIncludes(header);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
isApplicationJsonSplit
isApplicationJsonIncludes
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
gemma2:9b
, generated one year ago):
This benchmark compares two JavaScript functions: `isApplicationJsonSplit` and `isApplicationJsonIncludes`. Both functions aim to determine if a given text string represents a valid "application/json" header. **Here's a breakdown:** * **`isApplicationJsonSplit`:** This function splits the input text by semicolon (`;`), trims each part, and checks if any of the trimmed parts are equal to "application/json". * **`isApplicationJsonIncludes`:** This function uses the `includes()` method to directly check if the input text contains the substring "application/json". **Pros and Cons:** * **`isApplicationJsonSplit`:** * **Pros:** More explicit in its approach, breaking down the header string for analysis. * **Cons:** Potentially more computationally expensive due to splitting and iterating through the parts. * **`isApplicationJsonIncludes`:** * **Pros:** Concise and generally faster as it directly checks for the substring. * **Cons:** Less explicit in its approach; may be less readable for some developers. **Other Considerations:** * **Edge Cases:** Both functions should handle edge cases like empty strings or malformed headers gracefully. * **Performance:** The benchmark results show that `isApplicationJsonIncludes` is significantly faster, executing nearly twice as many times per second compared to `isApplicationJsonSplit`. **Alternatives:** 1. **Regular Expressions:** A more complex but potentially more robust approach could use a regular expression to match the "application/json" pattern within the header string. 2. **Third-Party Libraries:** Specialized libraries for parsing HTTP headers might offer optimized solutions and handle various edge cases efficiently. In this specific scenario, `isApplicationJsonIncludes` offers a good balance of conciseness, readability, and performance.
Related benchmarks:
includes vs === v1
check application json startswith vs includes
String equals vs String.includes
equals vs includes (one value)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?