Benchmark: check navigator.language v3

Tests:

indexOf()
!navigator.language.indexOf('ru')
substr()
'ru'===navigator.language.substr(0,2)
test()
/^ru/.test(navigator.language)
=== || ===
navigator.language==='ru'||navigator.language==='ru-RU'
substring()
'ru'===navigator.language.substring(0,2)
===
navigator.language==='ru-RU'

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
indexOf()
substr()
test()
=== \|\| ===
substring()
===

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/109.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 109 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
indexOf()	2243526.2 Ops/sec
substr()	2240259.2 Ops/sec
test()	1871833.5 Ops/sec
=== \|\| ===	1153604.5 Ops/sec
substring()	2534682.0 Ops/sec
===	2533111.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark defined in the provided JSON focuses on evaluating different methods of checking the browser's language setting using JavaScript's `navigator.language`. Below, we describe the individual test cases, comparing each method's performance in terms of execution speed and their respective pros and cons.

### Test Cases Overview

1. **`!navigator.language.indexOf('ru')` (indexOf)**
   - **Description**: This approach checks if the string 'ru' does **not** appear at the start of `navigator.language` by using the `indexOf` function. If 'ru' is found, it returns an index greater than or equal to 0.
   - **Performance**: 2,243,526.25 executions per second.
   - **Pros**:
     - Simple to understand.
     - Works well for determining the presence of a substring.
   - **Cons**:
     - Requires an additional logical NOT operator to interpret the result.
     - Slightly less readable due to negation.

2. **`'ru'===navigator.language.substr(0,2)` (substr)**
   - **Description**: This method checks if the first two characters of `navigator.language` are exactly 'ru' using the `substr` function.
   - **Performance**: 2,534,682.0 executions per second.
   - **Pros**:
     - Straightforward and easy to read.
     - Explicitly specifies the characters to compare.
   - **Cons**:
     - `substr` is generally less preferred than `substring` or `slice`, as it can lead to confusion regarding flexibility with parameters.
   
3. **`/^ru/.test(navigator.language)` (test)**
   - **Description**: This method employs a regular expression to check if `navigator.language` begins with 'ru'.
   - **Performance**: 1,871,833.5 executions per second.
   - **Pros**:
     - Regular expressions are powerful for pattern matching.
     - Can easily extend to more complex checks.
   - **Cons**:
     - Slightly less readable for those unfamiliar with regex syntax.
     - Slightly lower performance due to regex processing overhead.

4. **`navigator.language==='ru'||navigator.language==='ru-RU'` (=== || ===)**
   - **Description**: This simple boolean expression checks if `navigator.language` is either 'ru' or 'ru-RU'.
   - **Performance**: 1,153,604.5 executions per second.
   - **Pros**:
     - Very readable.
     - Straightforward to extend additional language codes.
   - **Cons**:
     - Requires multiple comparisons, which can get cumbersome for many languages.
     - Less efficient with a growing number of comparisons.

5. **`'ru'===navigator.language.substring(0,2)` (substring)**
   - **Description**: Similar to the `substr`, this method checks if the first two characters of `navigator.language` are 'ru' using `substring`.
   - **Performance**: 2,533,111.75 executions per second.
   - **Pros**:
     - More commonly recommended than `substr`, for being less error-prone in usage.
   - **Cons**:
     - Slightly verbose compared to a direct comparison when only checking the first two characters.

6. **`navigator.language==='ru-RU'` (===)**
   - **Description**: A direct comparison that checks if the language is exactly 'ru-RU'.
   - **Performance**: 2,533,111.75 executions per second.
   - **Pros**:
     - Extremely clear and concise.
     - Fast for exact matches.
   - **Cons**:
     - Only works for an exact match, doesn't consider variations or a broader language check.

### Summary of Performance
The performance results show that the `substring()` and straightforward equality checks (`===` and `=== || ===`) are the fastest methods in this benchmark. Both the `indexOf()` and regex (`test()`) approaches performed slower but provide different functionality that may be applicable depending on the complexity and flexibility required in language detection.

### Alternatives
Other alternatives to the methods tested include:
- **`startsWith()`**: A modern approach that directly checks if a string starts with a specified characters (e.g., `navigator.language.startsWith('ru')`). It's clear and efficient for this use case but may not be supported in very old browsers.
- **Try-Catch Method**: Creating a wrapper function using `try-catch` to handle failures in parsing or accessing `navigator.language` could be considered but may introduce unnecessary complexity.

### Conclusion
The best choice depends on the specific requirements of the application, such as the desired readability of the code versus performance considerations, as well as compatibility with the target environments. The tested benchmarks provide a solid foundation for making decisions based on execution speed and code clarity in language detection scenarios.

Related benchmarks:

check navigator.language v3 (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: indexOf() vs substr() vs test() vs === || === vs substring() vs ===

Created: 2 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

indexOf()

substr()

test()

=== || ===

substring()

===

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):