Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
Test class map parsing
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
Comparing performance of:
split destructure vs split index vs slice
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
value = '#container'
Tests:
split destructure
const [_, name] = value.split('#', 2)
split index
const name = value.split('#', 2)[1]
slice
const name = value.slice(1)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
split destructure
split index
slice
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
2 years ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 123 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=515749" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
slice
6.3M/s
split index
3.2M/s
split destructure
3.2M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
slice
6,283,348 Ops/sec
split index
3,231,240 Ops/sec
split destructure
3,219,638 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down what's being tested on the provided JSON. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is testing how fast JavaScript can parse a string containing an '#' symbol, using different methods. **Options Compared** There are three options compared: 1. **Split destructure**: `const [_, name] = value.split('#', 2)`. This method uses destructuring to extract the second part of the string (everything after the first '#'). 2. **Split index**: `const name = value.split('#', 2)[1]`. This method uses indexing to access the second part of the array returned by `split()`. 3. **Slice**: `const name = value.slice(1)`. This method uses the `slice()` method to extract a substring starting from the second character. **Pros and Cons** * **Split destructure**: Pros: concise, readable, and expressive. Cons: may be slower due to the overhead of destructuring. * **Split index**: Pros: simple, fast. Cons: may not be as readable or maintainable as the other options. * **Slice**: Pros: straightforward, efficient. Cons: may not be as clear or concise as the other options. **Library and Special JS Features** There is no specific library being used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the `split()` method uses a regular expression under the hood, which can be an optimization. No special JavaScript features are being tested here, but some minor considerations: * The use of `const` declarations ensures immutability and helps with performance. * The use of template literals (`#container`) is not being tested explicitly, but it's worth noting that this syntax is used to create string literals with embedded expressions. **Other Alternatives** If you were to reimplement this benchmark using a different approach, some alternatives could be: * Using `substring()` instead of `slice()`. * Using regular expressions (e.g., `value.match(/#.*$/)[0]`) for the parsing step. * Using a library like `lodash` or `underscore` that provides utility functions for string manipulation. However, it's worth noting that the original benchmark is designed to test the performance of these specific methods, so alternatives might not be directly comparable.
Related benchmarks
Map.set vs Object assign
+ vs Number
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?