Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
json parse vs manual
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Json.stringify vs manual
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
obj = '{ crid: "13216546879", size: 13, fullsize: 123 }'; str = '123456|13|123';
Tests:
Json.stringify
const json = JSON.stringify(obj); const crid = json.crid; const size = json.size; const fsize = json.fullsize;
manual
const crid = str.substring(0,6); const size = Number(str.substring(7,9)); const fsize = Number(str.substring(10,13));
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Json.stringify
manual
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):
**Overview of the Benchmark** The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between using `JSON.stringify()` to parse JSON data versus manually parsing it in JavaScript. The benchmark is designed to test how efficient these two approaches are for extracting specific values from a JSON object. **Options Compared** Two options are compared: 1. **`JSON.stringify()`**: This method converts a JSON object into a string, which can then be parsed again to extract the desired values. 2. **Manual Parsing**: This approach involves using JavaScript's `substring()` and `Number()` functions to manually extract the required values from the original JSON string. **Pros and Cons** * **`JSON.stringify()`**: + Pros: Convenient, straightforward, and widely supported by most browsers. + Cons: Creates an additional string, which can lead to increased memory usage and potentially slower performance due to string concatenation. * **Manual Parsing**: + Pros: More control over the parsing process, does not create an additional string, and might be more efficient in terms of memory usage. + Cons: Requires manual implementation and may be less readable or maintainable. **Library Used** There is no specific library used in this benchmark. The only JavaScript feature employed is `JSON.stringify()`. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** None are mentioned in the provided code snippet. However, it's worth noting that some browsers might optimize or have special handling for certain features like `JSON.stringify()`. **Alternative Approaches** Other alternatives to measure parsing performance could include: * Using different JSON parsing libraries (e.g., `lodash.json`, `json-stringify-safe`). * Implementing a custom parsing function using regular expressions. * Comparing parsing performance with other data formats, such as CSV or XML. * Measuring the impact of parsing on performance under specific conditions, like large datasets or concurrent execution. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The provided code prepares an example JSON object (`obj`) and converts it into a string using `JSON.stringify()`. This string is then used to demonstrate manual parsing. The benchmark definition specifies two test cases: 1. One that uses `JSON.stringify()` to parse the JSON object. 2. Another that manually parses the same JSON string. **Latest Benchmark Result** The latest result shows the performance of both approaches on a desktop device with Yandex Browser 23, running macOS 10.15.7. The `JSON.stringify()` approach outperforms manual parsing, indicating faster execution per second.
Related benchmarks:
ITFB. Reinventing JSON parser
json parse vs manual 3
JSON.parse vs String.substring for fetching one value
JSON.parse vs structuredClone
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?