Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
string.at() vs string[0]
(version: 1)
Comparing performance of:
string.at() vs string[0]
Created:
one year ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
let string = 'a'.repeat(3000)
Tests:
string.at()
for (let i = 3000; --i;)var test = string.at()
string[0]
for (let i = 3000; --i;)var test = string[0]
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
string.at()
string[0]
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 YaBrowser/24.12.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Yandex Browser 24 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=579548" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
string[0]
165K/s
string.at()
40K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
string[0]
164,958 Ops/sec
string.at()
39,693 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
gpt-4o-mini
, generated one year ago):
The benchmark provided compares two different methods of accessing the first character of a string in JavaScript: 1. **`string.at()`**: This method is used to retrieve a character from a string at a specified index. The `at()` method is a relatively newer addition to JavaScript (introduced in ECMAScript 2022) and allows for a more flexible approach to string indexing, including handling negative indices to fetch characters from the end of the string. 2. **`string[0]`**: This method accesses the first character of a string using bracket notation, which has been part of JavaScript since its inception. It is a very straightforward and commonly used way to access elements in arrays and strings. ### Pros and Cons #### `string.at()` **Pros:** - Flexibility: Supports negative indexing, allowing access to characters from the end of the string (e.g., `string.at(-1)` gets the last character). - Improved readability for beginners, as it clearly indicates that you are accessing a character at a specific index. **Cons:** - Potentially slower performance: As indicated by the benchmark results, it has a lower execution rate compared to `string[0]`. This is important in performance-critical applications, especially in loops or large scale operations. - Not as widely used yet since it is a newer feature; older codebases may not support it. #### `string[0]` **Pros:** - Performance: The benchmark shows that `string[0]` performed better with approximately 1687 executions per second compared to 1499 for `string.at()`, making it a better choice for performance-sensitive code. - Familiarity: This notation has been used since the early days of JavaScript, making it more recognizable to developers. **Cons:** - Limited flexibility: Only allows positive indexing. Negative indexing must be manually calculated. - Readability may suffer in cases where the intended character position is calculated or derived, making it less clear than `string.at()` could be. ### Other Considerations The benchmark is fairly straightforward, focusing only on the first character of the string. However, if the string was longer or if more character access methods were included, a wider analysis could be conducted. Considerations such as different lengths of strings, the complexity of the operations, and other environmental factors (like browser optimizations) could influence performance results. ### Alternatives Other alternatives for accessing string characters could include: - **Using `String.prototype.slice()`**: This method allows you to extract a segment from the string and can also be used to get the first character, e.g., `string.slice(0, 1)`. - **Using `String.prototype.substring()`**: Similar to slice, `substring(0, 1)` will also get the first character. - **Using `String.prototype.charAt()`**: This method returns the character at a specified index as well and has been part of JavaScript for a long time (e.g., `string.charAt(0)`). Each of these alternatives has its nuances in terms of flexibility and readability but will generally perform similarly to the aforementioned methods depending on the context. In conclusion, while `string.at()` offers some advantages in terms of usability and flexibility, for accessing the first character of a string, `string[0]` remains the more performant and traditional choice.
Related benchmarks
Var vs Let
let vs var for loop
String.charAt vs String.sub
String vs. Template Literal
++i vs i++
++i vs i++ v.2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?