Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
trim() Access Methods
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Prototype APPLY vs Prototype CALL vs Cached ProtoType APPLY vs Cached ProtoType CALL vs Implicit TempObj vs Explicit TempObj
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var str = ' wefdwaefrwaef asadf asdfasdfa asdf ' var str2 = '' var trim = String.prototype.trim
Tests:
Prototype APPLY
str2 = String.prototype.trim.apply(str)
Prototype CALL
str2 = String.prototype.trim.call(str)
Cached ProtoType APPLY
str2 = trim.apply(str)
Cached ProtoType CALL
str2 = trim.call(str)
Implicit TempObj
str2 = str.trim()
Explicit TempObj
var tempObj = new String(str) str2 = tempObj.trim() delete tempObj
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (6)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Prototype APPLY
Prototype CALL
Cached ProtoType APPLY
Cached ProtoType CALL
Implicit TempObj
Explicit TempObj
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript benchmarks. **Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark tests the performance of different ways to call the `trim()` method on strings in JavaScript. The test cases vary in how they approach this, and we'll break down each one. **Options Compared** There are six test cases: 1. **Prototype APPLY**: Calls `String.prototype.trim.apply(str)` 2. **Prototype CALL**: Calls `String.prototype.trim.call(str)` 3. **Cached Prototype APPLY**: Calls `trim.apply(str)` ( caching the result of `String.prototype.trim`) 4. **Cached Prototype CALL**: Calls `trim.call(str)` (caching the result of `String.prototype.trim`) 5. **Implicit TempObj**: Uses the implicit temporary object syntax, i.e., `str.trim()` 6. **Explicit TempObj**: Creates a new temporary object using `new String(str)`, followed by calling its `trim()` method **Pros and Cons** Here's a brief rundown of each approach: * **Prototype APPLY** and **Prototype CALL**: These methods are efficient because they use the internal function cache of the `String.prototype.trim` method. However, they require a single call to create the `apply()` or `call()` context object, which can be overhead for some implementations. * **Cached Prototype APPLY** and **Cached Prototype CALL**: By caching the result of `trim()`, we avoid the overhead of creating the `apply()` or `call()` context objects. This approach is more efficient but may not work in older browsers that don't support function caching. * **Implicit TempObj**: This approach uses the implicit temporary object syntax, which can be faster because it avoids the overhead of creating a new object and then calling its method. However, this method may not be supported by all browsers. * **Explicit TempObj**: Creating a new temporary object using `new String(str)` is the most explicit way to call `trim()`. While it's slower than the other methods due to the overhead of creating an object, it's also more browser-compatible. **Library and Purpose** In this benchmark, we're using the `String.prototype.trim` method from the JavaScript standard library. This method is a built-in function that removes whitespace characters (space, tab, newline, etc.) from both ends of a string. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The benchmark doesn't mention any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's already covered by the standard library and the approaches outlined above. **Other Alternatives** Some alternative ways to trim strings in JavaScript might include: * Using a library like Lodash, which provides a `trim()` function that can handle various edge cases. * Creating a custom trimming function using `String.prototype.replace()`. * Using a string processing library like StringPilot or Trim. However, these alternatives are not directly relevant to this specific benchmark, which focuses on the performance differences between different approaches to calling `trim()` on strings.
Related benchmarks:
Regex detecting whitespace vs trim
Regex detecting whitespace vs trim
trim test_ceeres
Regex whitespace check vs trim length
trim() vs replace()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?