Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Check date comparison
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
long vs short
Created:
8 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
long
const today = new Date(1525255491); const today2 = new Date(1525262691); const yesterday = new Date(1525176291); const lastMonth = new Date(1522670691); const lastYear = new Date(1493726691); function check(date1, date2) { return ( date1.getDate() === date2.getDate() && date1.getMonth() === date2.getMonth() && date1.getFullYear() === date2.getFullYear() ); } check(today, today2); check(today, yesterday); check(today, lastMonth); check(today, lastYear);
short
const today = new Date(1525255491); const today2 = new Date(1525262691); const yesterday = new Date(1525176291); const lastMonth = new Date(1522670691); const lastYear = new Date(1493726691); function check(date1, date2) { return date1.toDateString() === date2.toDateString(); } check(today, today2); check(today, yesterday); check(today, lastMonth); check(today, lastYear);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
long
short
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 benchmark and its options. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that tests date comparison in two different ways: using `getDate()`, `getMonth()` and `getFullYear()` (option A) vs. using `toDateString()` (option B). **Options Compared** Option A: Using `getDate()`, `getMonth()` and `getFullYear()` to compare dates. This approach is straightforward but might be slower due to the individual component access, which can lead to more branching and potentially slower JavaScript engine optimizations. Option B: Using `toDateString()` to compare dates. `toDateString()` returns a string representing the date in a format like "Day, Month DD YYYY". This approach might be faster as it reduces the number of steps and operations involved, making it easier for JavaScript engines to optimize. **Pros and Cons** Pros of Option A: * More explicit comparison (e.g., checking each component individually) * Easier to understand and maintain Cons of Option A: * Might be slower due to more branching and individual component access * Less optimized by JavaScript engines Pros of Option B: * Faster due to reduced steps and operations involved * More optimized by JavaScript engines, as `toDateString()` is a built-in method with known performance characteristics. Cons of Option B: * Less explicit comparison (e.g., comparing strings directly) * Might be harder to understand and maintain for some developers **Libraries and Special JS Features** In this benchmark, no libraries are used other than the standard JavaScript Date object. No special JavaScript features or syntax are mentioned in the provided code. **Other Considerations** The use of `toDateString()` is a built-in method that returns a string representation of a date. This approach can be faster and more optimized by JavaScript engines due to its known performance characteristics. **Alternatives** If you wanted to test other approaches, some alternatives could include: * Using a custom function to compare dates (similar to Option A) * Comparing dates using a library like Moment.js or Luxon * Testing with different date formats (e.g., ISO 8601) * Adding more complex comparison scenarios (e.g., comparing dates in different time zones)
Related benchmarks:
Intl.DateTimeFormat
JS Check Valid Date String
Date comparison without time
parseDateISO vs parseDate vs parseDateInline
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?