Benchmark: endsWith vs slice equality

Tests:

endsWith
'foo/bar/index'.endsWith('/index')
slice equality
'foo/bar/index'.slice(-6) === '/index'

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
endsWith
slice equality

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/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/127.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 127 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
endsWith	24545938.0 Ops/sec
slice equality	22547412.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON benchmark definitions and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Definitions:**

We have two test cases:

1. `endsWith`: Tests if `'foo/bar/index'` ends with `'index'`.
2. `slice equality`: Tests if slicing `'foo/bar/index'` to the last 6 characters (`'-6'`) returns a string equal to `'/'`.

**Options being compared:**

In both test cases, we're comparing two approaches:

1. **endsWith**: Uses the `endsWith()` method.
2. **slice equality**: Slices the string using the `-6` index and compares it to `'/'` using the `===` operator.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **endsWith()**
	* Pros:
		+ More readable and expressive code
		+ Fewer occurrences of `==` or `===`, which can be less error-prone
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower due to the overhead of a method call
		+ Not as efficient for large strings, since it needs to traverse the entire string to find the end index
2. **Slice equality**
	* Pros:
		+ Faster execution time for large strings, since only a slice of the original string is created and compared
		+ Can be more efficient in terms of memory usage
	* Cons:
		+ Less readable and expressive code, especially for complex slicing scenarios
		+ More occurrences of `==` or `===`, which can increase errors

**Library:**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided JSON. However, the use of `endsWith()` suggests that it might be a built-in method on strings in JavaScript.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

None mentioned.

**Other considerations:**

When choosing between these approaches, consider the trade-off between code readability and performance:

* If you prioritize readability and are working with relatively small to medium-sized strings, `endsWith()` might be the better choice.
* If you're dealing with large strings or need to optimize for execution time, `slice equality` could be a better option.

**Other alternatives:**

Some alternative approaches could include using regular expressions (e.g., `\b$` matches the end of the string) or leveraging browser-specific optimizations (e.g., in Safari). However, these approaches would likely introduce additional complexity and might not provide significant performance gains over the current `endsWith()` and `slice equality` methods.

Related benchmarks:

endsWith vs slice equality (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: endsWith vs slice equality

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

endsWith

slice equality

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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