Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
ISO Datetime - add microseconds - replace vs slice
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
ISO Datetime - add microseconds - replace vs slice
Comparing performance of:
replace vs slice
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var strIn = '2023-12-18T12:30:00Z'; var strOut = '';
Tests:
replace
strOut = strIn.replace('Z', '123Z');
slice
strOut = strIn.slice(0, -1) + '123Z';
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
replace
slice
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 years ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/116.0.5764.195 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 116 on Linux
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=490586" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
slice
4.5M/s
replace
3.6M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
slice
4,461,801 Ops/sec
replace
3,552,518 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and its test cases. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches to add microseconds to an ISO datetime string: 1. `strOut = strIn.replace('Z', '123Z');` 2. `strOut = strIn.slice(0, -1) + '123Z';` **Options Compared** Two options are compared in this benchmark: A. **`replace()`**: The `replace()` method is used to replace a specified value with another value. In this case, it's used to replace the `'Z'` suffix (indicating UTC time) with `'123Z'`. B. **`slice()`**: The `slice()` method returns a new string that includes all characters before the specified start index and up to but not including the specified end index. Here, it's used to remove the last character of the original string (`strIn`) and then append `'123Z'` to it. **Pros and Cons** 1. **`replace()`** * Pros: + Simple and straightforward approach. + Fast because it only requires a single operation (string comparison). * Cons: + May be slower if the string needs to be parsed or validated before replacement. 2. **`slice()`** * Pros: + Can be faster than `replace()` when dealing with long strings, as it avoids parsing and validation overhead. * Cons: + Requires more operations (string slicing and concatenation), which may lead to slower performance. **Library** Neither of the two approaches uses a library. They are built-in methods of JavaScript's String prototype. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. The code only employs standard JavaScript methods (`replace()` and `slice()`) and basic string manipulation techniques. **Other Alternatives** If the developer wanted to explore alternative approaches, they might consider: 1. **Using a dedicated date formatting library**, such as moment.js or Luxon. 2. **Implementing custom parsing and formatting logic**, potentially using regular expressions or other specialized methods. However, in this specific benchmark, both `replace()` and `slice()` are used because they are concise, efficient, and straightforward for the task at hand. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The script preparation code provided sets up a test string (`strIn`) with an ISO datetime value followed by `'Z'`, which is then modified according to each approach (either replaced or sliced). The resulting strings (`strOut`) are not used to compare performance, but rather serve as input for the `Benchmark Definition` json. Overall, this benchmark helps users understand the relative performance of two simple string manipulation approaches in JavaScript: replacing a character with another value versus removing a character and appending a new value.
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?