Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Reduce-based serialize vs JSON serialize
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
JSON serialize vs Reduce serialize
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
window.address = [{ childrenIndex: 0 }, { toggleIndex: 1 }, { instanceIndex: 2 }, { childrenIndex: 0 }, { toggleIndex: 1 }, { instanceIndex: 2 }, { childrenIndex: 0 }, { toggleIndex: 1 }, { instanceIndex: 2 }, { childrenIndex: 0 }, { toggleIndex: 1 }, { instanceIndex: 2 }, { childrenIndex: 0 }, { toggleIndex: 1 }, { instanceIndex: 2 }]; window.serializeAddressJSON = (address) => JSON.stringify(address); window.serializeAddressReduce = (address) => address.reduce((serialized, point) => { const { childrenIndex, toggleIndex, instanceIndex } = point; let pointCode; if (childrenIndex !== undefined) { pointCode = `c${childrenIndex}`; } if (toggleIndex !== undefined) { pointCode = `t${toggleIndex}`; } if (instanceIndex !== undefined) { pointCode = `i${instanceIndex}`; } return `${serialized}${pointCode}`; }, '');
Tests:
JSON serialize
serializeAddressJSON(window.address)
Reduce serialize
serializeAddressReduce(window.address)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
JSON serialize
Reduce serialize
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one month ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/146.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 146 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
JSON serialize
2895620.0 Ops/sec
Reduce serialize
4270713.0 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, along with the pros and cons of each approach. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark compares two approaches to serializing a specific data structure: JSON serialization using `JSON.stringify()` and reduce-based serialization. **Data Structure** The data structure consists of an array of objects, where each object has three properties: `childrenIndex`, `toggleIndex`, and `instanceIndex`. The goal is to serialize this data structure in two different ways: 1. **JSON Serialization**: Using the `JSON.stringify()` method, which converts a JavaScript value (in this case, the entire `address` array) into a JSON string. 2. **Reduce-Based Serialization**: Implementing a custom reduce function that concatenates strings representing the child indices (`c`), toggle indices (`t`), and instance indices (`i`) from each object in the array. **Library** There is no explicit library mentioned, but `JSON.stringify()` is a built-in JavaScript method for serializing JSON data. The custom reduce function used in the **Reduce serialize** approach is also a part of the standard JavaScript API. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The only special feature/syntax used here is the use of string interpolation (`${ }`) to concatenate strings, which is a modern JavaScript syntax introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). **Options Compared** Two options are compared: 1. **JSON Serialization**: Using `JSON.stringify()` to serialize the data structure. 2. **Reduce-Based Serialization**: Implementing a custom reduce function to concatenate strings representing child indices, toggle indices, and instance indices. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** **JSON Serialization** Pros: * Simple and well-established method * Widely supported by most browsers and JavaScript engines Cons: * May not be as efficient as custom implementations for specific use cases * Can result in larger serialized data due to the overhead of additional characters (e.g., double quotes) **Reduce-Based Serialization** Pros: * Can be more efficient than JSON serialization, especially for large datasets * Allows for fine-grained control over the serialization process Cons: * Requires implementing a custom reduce function, which can add complexity * May not be as widely supported by browsers and JavaScript engines **Considerations** When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors: * Performance: If efficiency is crucial, the custom reduce-based approach might be a better choice. However, if simplicity and broad compatibility are more important, JSON serialization might be sufficient. * Control: If you need to customize the serialization process or ensure specific output formatting, the reduce-based approach provides more control. **Other Alternatives** If neither of these approaches is suitable for your use case, consider alternative serialization methods: * **String Concatenation**: Using string concatenation operators (`+`) instead of `JSON.stringify()`. * **Template Literals**: Using template literals (e.g., `${}`) to serialize data. * **External Libraries**: Utilizing external libraries like JSON or serialization-specific tools for more complex data structures. Keep in mind that each alternative has its own trade-offs and may not be as efficient or widely supported as the built-in JavaScript methods.
Related benchmarks:
Lodash isEqual vs JSON serialize
Reduce serialize vs JSON serialize
Reduce serialize vs JSON serialize with replace
Reduce deserialize vs JSON deserialize
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?