Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
safe includes vs parsed object
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lowecase includes vs parse
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var str = '{"type": "error", "data": {"message": "Kafka Cluster unavailable"}, "channel": "users", "subscriptionUUID": "xxxxxxxx-945f-418c-ac4c-xxxxxxxxxxx"}';
Tests:
lowecase includes
str.toLowerCase().includes('kafka cluster unavailable')
parse
JSON.parse(str).data.message
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lowecase includes
parse
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 break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is defined by two test cases: 1. `lowecase includes`: Tests if `str.toLowerCase().includes('kafka cluster unavailable')` is faster than a direct string comparison. 2. `parse`: Tests if parsing the JSON object using `JSON.parse(str).data.message` is faster than a direct property access. **Options Compared** The two options being compared are: 1. **Direct String Comparison**: Using the `includes()` method to check if a substring exists within a string. 2. **Parsing JSON Object**: Parsing a JSON string into an object using `JSON.parse(str)` and then accessing a nested property (`data.message`). **Pros and Cons** **Direct String Comparison (includes())** Pros: * Simple and straightforward implementation * Works well for most use cases Cons: * Can be slower than parsing JSON if the string is large or complex * May not work correctly with non-ASCII characters or special regex patterns **Parsing JSON Object** Pros: * Can handle more complex data structures, such as nested objects * Can be faster than direct string comparison for large strings Cons: * Requires additional processing to parse the JSON string * May add overhead due to the parsing step **Library and Purpose** In this benchmark, `JSON.parse()` is a built-in JavaScript function used to parse a JSON string into an object. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There doesn't seem to be any special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two different approaches to string comparison: direct comparison using the `includes()` method and parsing JSON. **Other Alternatives** Some alternative approaches that could have been used in this benchmark include: * Using a regular expression to match the substring * Using a library like Lodash or Moment.js for string manipulation * Using a specialized data structure, such as a trie, for fast substring matching However, the current implementation using `includes()` and `JSON.parse()` is straightforward and easy to understand, making it an effective benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
Filter creeps - for in vs. lodash filter
JSON.parse - aggregated events vs single events
lodash clone vs. JSON.parse(JSON.stringify()) vs. fastest-json-copy | On a Big Object
JSON Stringify Speed Test 0
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?