Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
MomentJS vs Native Date 2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Moment vs Native
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/moment.js/2.22.0/moment.min.js'></script>
Tests:
Moment
moment().add(1, 'd');
Native
const date = new Date(); date.setDate(date.getDate() + 1);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Moment
Native
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):
I'd be happy to explain what's tested in the provided benchmark. **Overview** The benchmark compares the performance of Moment.js, a popular JavaScript library for working with dates, and native JavaScript date arithmetic. The test measures how quickly these two approaches can perform a specific date-related operation: adding one day to the current date. **Test Cases** There are only two test cases: 1. **Moment**: The test case runs the following code: ```javascript moment().add(1, 'd'); ``` This is a Moment.js function that adds one day to the current moment (i.e., the moment when the script started executing). 2. **Native**: The test case runs the following code: ```javascript const date = new Date(); date.setDate(date.getDate() + 1); ``` This is native JavaScript code that creates a new `Date` object and increments its day by one using the `setDate()` method. **Comparison** The benchmark measures how many executions per second each approach can perform. The results are: * Moment.js: approximately 2,033,303 executions per second * Native JavaScript: approximately 6,267,074 executions per second **Options Compared** In this benchmark, two options are compared: 1. **Moment.js**: A JavaScript library that provides a convenient way to work with dates. 2. **Native JavaScript**: The built-in JavaScript date arithmetic, which is optimized for performance. **Pros and Cons** Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach: * **Moment.js**: + Pros: Convenient API, handles edge cases (e.g., leap years), and can be used for more complex date calculations. + Cons: Adds an overhead due to the library itself, and its performance may not be as good as native JavaScript arithmetic in some cases. * **Native JavaScript**: + Pros: Optimized for performance, uses fewer resources than Moment.js. + Cons: Requires manual handling of edge cases (e.g., leap years), can be less convenient to use. **Other Considerations** When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors: * Performance-critical code: If your application requires high-performance date arithmetic, native JavaScript might be a better choice. * Convenience and ease of use: If you need to perform more complex date calculations or want to handle edge cases easily, Moment.js might be a better fit. **Library Used** In this benchmark, the `moment.js` library is used. Moment.js is a popular JavaScript library for working with dates, created by Tim Petrille. It provides a convenient API for various date-related operations and can handle edge cases (e.g., leap years) automatically. No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these test cases. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative libraries to Moment.js, consider the following: * `date-fns`: A lightweight library for working with dates in JavaScript. * `luxon`: A modern JavaScript date and time library that provides a convenient API and optimized performance. Keep in mind that these alternatives might have different strengths and weaknesses compared to Moment.js.
Related benchmarks:
MomentJS VS Native
Date vs moment 1238uu
MomentJS vs Native test
MomentJS vs Native Date
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?