Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Date vs Moment test
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Moment vs Date
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdn.rawgit.com/moment/moment/2.7.0/moment.js"></script>
Tests:
Moment
moment().isAfter('2010-01-01');
Date
new Date().getTime() > new Date('2010-01-01').getTime();
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Moment
Date
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):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks! **Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided JSON represents a benchmark test between two libraries: Moment.js and the built-in JavaScript `Date` object. **What is tested?** The benchmark tests the performance of two approaches: 1. **Moment.js**: A popular library for working with dates in JavaScript. It provides an intuitive and easy-to-use API for formatting, parsing, and manipulating dates. 2. **Built-in JavaScript Date object**: The native JavaScript `Date` object, which provides a simple way to work with dates and times. **Options compared** The benchmark compares the performance of two options: 1. Using Moment.js (`moment().isAfter('2010-01-01');`) 2. Using the built-in JavaScript `Date` object (`new Date().getTime() > new Date('2010-01-01').getTime();`) **Pros and Cons** **Moment.js:** Pros: * Easy to use and understand * Provides a rich set of date-related methods and functions Cons: * Requires an external library ( Moment.js) to be included in the test environment * May introduce additional overhead due to the library's functionality **Built-in JavaScript Date object:** Pros: * Native performance, as it doesn't require any external libraries * Lightweight and efficient Cons: * Can be less intuitive for complex date calculations * May not provide all the features of Moment.js **Other considerations** * The benchmark uses a specific version of Moment.js (2.7.0) to ensure consistency. * The test environment is likely using a similar setup, including the same browser and operating system configuration. **Library descriptions** * **Moment.js**: A JavaScript library for working with dates and times. It provides an intuitive API for formatting, parsing, and manipulating dates, as well as supporting features like timezones and time zones calculations. * **Built-in JavaScript Date object**: The native JavaScript `Date` object, which provides a simple way to work with dates and times. **Special JS features** None are mentioned in the provided code snippets. However, it's worth noting that some modern JavaScript features, such as async/await or decorators, may affect performance benchmarks like this one. **Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative libraries or approaches for working with dates in JavaScript, consider: * **Day.js**: A lightweight and fast date library that provides a similar API to Moment.js. * **Luxon**: A modern date library that offers a rich set of features and is designed for high-performance applications. * **Native JavaScript methods**: For simple use cases, the built-in JavaScript `Date` object can be sufficient. However, for more complex calculations or requirements, an external library may be necessary. Overall, this benchmark provides valuable insights into the performance differences between using a popular date library (Moment.js) versus relying on native JavaScript methods (the built-in `Date` object).
Related benchmarks:
Date vs Moment
Date vs Moment Formatt
Date.now() vs Moment()
Creating Date vs Moment
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?