Benchmark: Creating Date objects 350 vs 9000

Tests:

350 object creations
function parseMyDate() { const dateString = "2024-05-31T09:13:43.095Z"; if (/^\d+-\d+-\d+T\d+:\d+:\d+(\.\d+)?$/.test(dateString)) { dateString += 'Z'; } const result = Date.parse(dateString); return isNaN(result) ? null : (result / 1000.0); } for (var i=0; i<350; i++) { parseMyDate(); }
9000 object creations
function parseMyDate() { const dateString = "2024-05-31T09:13:43.095Z"; if (/^\d+-\d+-\d+T\d+:\d+:\d+(\.\d+)?$/.test(dateString)) { dateString += 'Z'; } const result = Date.parse(dateString); return isNaN(result) ? null : (result / 1000.0); } for (var i=0; i<9000; i++) { parseMyDate(); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
350 object creations
9000 object creations

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/17.3.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 17 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
350 object creations	27368.3 Ops/sec
9000 object creations	1063.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The test measures the performance difference between creating 350 Date objects versus 9000 Date objects in JavaScript.

The two options being compared are:

1. Creating 350 Date objects:
	* Pros: This option is more manageable and easier to implement, as it involves fewer iterations.
	* Cons: It may not accurately represent real-world scenarios where large numbers of Date object creations are required.
2. Creating 9000 Date objects:
	* Pros: This option more closely mimics real-world use cases where large quantities of Date objects need to be created, such as in data processing or analytics applications.
	* Cons: It involves more iterations and may be computationally intensive.

The test case uses the `Date` object, which is a built-in JavaScript object that represents a specific point in time. The purpose of the `Date` object is to provide a convenient way to work with dates and times in JavaScript.

In this specific benchmark definition, the `parseMyDate()` function is used to create Date objects. This function takes a date string as input, parses it, and returns the corresponding Date object. The `Date.parse()` method is used to parse the date string into a number representing the timestamp of the specified date and time.

The test case uses regular expressions (`/^\\d+-\\d+-\\d+T\\d+:\\d+:\\d+(\\.\\d+)?$/`) to validate the input date strings. This ensures that only valid date strings are passed to the `Date.parse()` method.

Other alternatives to creating Date objects could include using libraries like Moment.js or Luxon, which provide more advanced date and time manipulation capabilities. However, for simple use cases, the built-in JavaScript `Date` object is sufficient.

The benchmark results show that Safari 17 on a Mac OS X 10.15.7 desktop performed better on the smaller dataset (350 objects), while performing similarly or slightly worse on the larger dataset (9000 objects).

Related benchmarks:

Creating Date objects 350 vs 9000 (version: 0)

Checking how 350 Date object creations compares to 9000

Comparing performance of: 350 object creations vs 9000 object creations

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

350 object creations

9000 object creations

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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