Benchmark: Array join vs string template - simple case

Script Preparation code:

var str = "Hello World"
var newStr = "Goodbye"
var str2 = "Howdy"
var start = 5

Tests:

Array
const foo = [ str, newStr, 'Hi There', str2 ].join('')
template literal
const foo = `${str}${newStr}Hi There${str2}`

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array
template literal

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares two ways to concatenate strings: using an array with the `join()` method and using template literals.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is:
```javascript
var str = "Hello World";
var newStr = "Goodbye";
var str2 = "Howdy";
var start = 5;
```
This code defines four variables: three strings (`str`, `newStr`, and `str2`) and one integer (`start`). The purpose of this code is to provide a simple, constant setup for the benchmark test.

**Html Preparation Code**

The html preparation code is empty, which means that there are no additional HTML elements or markup in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition consists of two parts:

1. **Array Benchmark**: `const foo = [str, newStr, 'Hi There', str2].join('')`
This line concatenates the four strings with spaces using the `join()` method.
2. **Template Literal Benchmark**: `const foo = `${str}${newStr}Hi There${str2}``
This line uses template literals to concatenate the four strings with spaces.

**Options Compared**

The two benchmarks are compared in terms of performance, specifically:

* The time taken by each benchmark to execute
* The number of executions per second

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief analysis of each approach:

1. **Array with `join()` method**:
	* Pros: Simple, widely supported, and easy to read.
	* Cons: Can be slower due to the overhead of the `join()` method.
2. **Template Literals**:
	* Pros: Fast, efficient, and modern syntax that's gaining popularity.
	* Cons: Less readable than traditional concatenation methods, may require additional setup.

**Library**

The template literals used in this benchmark are part of the ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) standard. Template literals provide a concise way to embed expressions inside string literals, making it easier to create dynamic content.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

Template literals use the backtick (`\`) character to delimit the expression inside the string. This syntax is relatively new and not supported in older browsers. However, MeasureThat.net likely includes compatibility modes for older browsers.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative ways to concatenate strings, here are a few options:

1. **`+` operator**: `str + newStr + 'Hi There' + str2`
2. **`concat()` method**: `['', str, newStr, 'Hi There', str2].join('')`
3. **`Array.prototype.reduce()` method**: `[].reduce((acc, curr) => acc + curr, '')`

These alternatives have different performance characteristics and use cases, depending on the specific requirements of your application.

In conclusion, template literals offer a modern and efficient way to concatenate strings, but may require additional setup and compatibility considerations. The array with `join()` method is simpler and more widely supported, but may be slower due to its overhead.

Related benchmarks:

Array join vs string template - simple case (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array vs template literal

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array

template literal

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):