Benchmark: this is a test - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/luxon@1.26.0/build/global/luxon.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

const TIME_ZONE = "America/New_York";
const ms = 1789465498465;

Tests:

luxon
const minuteStart = luxon.DateTime.fromMillis(ms, { zone: TIME_ZONE }).toSQL({ includeOffset: false });
js native
const minuteStart = (new Date(ms)).toISOString();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
luxon
js native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/132.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 132 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
luxon	176086.4 Ops/sec
js native	1681086.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

This benchmark tests two different approaches for formatting a date based on a given timestamp: one using the Luxon library and the other using the native JavaScript `Date` object.

### Comparison of Approaches

1. **Luxon Library Approach:**
   - **Test Name:** luxon
   - **Benchmark Definition:** 
     ```javascript
     const minuteStart = luxon.DateTime.fromMillis(ms, { zone: TIME_ZONE }).toSQL({ includeOffset: false });
     ```
   - **Description:** 
     This test utilizes the Luxon library, which is a modern JavaScript date and time manipulation library. It creates a `DateTime` object from a millisecond timestamp (given by `ms`) and formats it to SQL standard without including the timezone offset.

- **Pros:**
     - **Ease of Use:** Luxon provides a clean and intuitive API for handling dates and times, especially with support for time zones and formatting.
     - **Functionality:** It offers rich functionalities like parsing, formatting, and manipulating dates in a way that’s often clearer and less error-prone than the native JavaScript methods.
     - **Time Zones:** Luxon is particularly strong in time zone handling, which is a complex aspect of date manipulation.

- **Cons:**
     - **Performance Overhead:** The use of an external library introduces additional overhead, resulting in generally lower performance compared to native methods.
     - **Bundle Size:** Including Luxon increases the overall size of your application, which can be a concern for performance-sensitive environments.

2. **JavaScript Native Approach:**
   - **Test Name:** js native
   - **Benchmark Definition:** 
     ```javascript
     const minuteStart = (new Date(ms)).toISOString();
     ```
   - **Description:** 
     This method leverages the JavaScript built-in `Date` object. It converts the millisecond timestamp into a date and then calls `toISOString()` to get the date string in a specific format (ISO 8601).

- **Pros:**
     - **Performance:** Generally faster since it uses native methods which are highly optimized by JavaScript engines.
     - **No Dependencies:** No need for additional libraries, reducing the complexity and size of the final application.
     - **Simplicity:** For standard date and time tasks, native methods are sufficient and are supported out of the box in any JavaScript environment.

- **Cons:**
     - **Limited Time Zone Support:** The native `Date` object has limited abilities when working with time zones, which can lead to potential misinterpretations if not handled correctly.
     - **Complexity in Formatting:** Formatting dates in various ways often requires additional code, making it less straightforward than using a specialized library.

### Other Considerations
- **Performance Results:** 
  From the benchmark results, the native JavaScript approach significantly outperformed the Luxon library method, with 1,681,086.5 executions per second for the native method compared to 176,086.42 for Luxon. This confirms the overhead associated with using a library when simpler tasks can be accomplished using native features.

### Alternatives
- **Other Libraries:** Alternatives to Luxon that provide robust date manipulation capabilities include:
  - **Moment.js:** A well-known library, but it is considered heavyweight and is being deprecated for new applications.
  - **date-fns:** A modern alternative that provides a wide range of date utility functions without a large footprint.
  - **day.js:** A lightweight alternative to Moment.js that offers a similar API but is much smaller in size.

- **Native Solutions:** For basic date operations, sticking to native `Date` methods is often sufficient, especially in performance-critical applications where minimizing dependency sizes is essential.

In summary, this benchmark evaluates the trade-offs between using a well-established date library and native JavaScript methods, highlighting the performance, ease of use, and functionality differences that developers must consider when deciding which approach to implement in their applications.

Related benchmarks:

this is a test (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: luxon vs js native

Created: 2 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

luxon

js native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 2 months ago):