Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
slice vs substr vs substring
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
Compares slice, substr and substring to each other when there is only a start index
Comparing performance of:
slice vs substr vs substring
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var example = 'hello world !'
Tests:
slice
var result = example.slice(0, 6)
substr
var result = example.substr(0, 6)
substring
var result = example.substring(0, 6)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
slice
substr
substring
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/136.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome Mobile 136 on Android
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=605736" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
substr
110.4M/s
substring
108.3M/s
slice
94.6M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
substr
110,375,856 Ops/sec
substring
108,259,528 Ops/sec
slice
94,592,480 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark compares the performance of three string slicing methods in JavaScript: `slice`, `substr`, and `substring`. The test is designed to measure the execution time of each method when only a start index is specified. **Methods Compared** 1. **`slice()`**: This method returns a new string containing all characters from the original string, starting at the specified index. 2. **`substr()`**: This method also returns a new string containing all characters from the original string, starting at the specified index. However, unlike `slice()`, `substr()` does not allow specifying an end index. The end index is assumed to be the length of the string if no second argument is provided. 3. **`substring()`**: This method returns a new string containing all characters from the original string, starting at the specified start index and ending at the specified end index. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **`slice()`**: * Pros: Fastest execution time among the three methods due to its direct access to the string's internal buffer. * Cons: May not be compatible with all browsers or environments, as it relies on the underlying string implementation. 2. **`substr()`**: * Pros: Simple and widely supported across browsers and environments. * Cons: Slower execution time compared to `slice()`, especially for large strings. 3. **`substring()`**: * Pros: More intuitive and flexible than `substr()`, allowing the specification of both start and end indices. * Cons: May be slower than `slice()` due to its additional overhead. **Library Usage** None of the methods use a library or any external dependencies in this benchmark. The test focuses solely on the native JavaScript string slicing methods. **Special JS Features or Syntax** No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in this benchmark. **Alternative Approaches** In addition to the three standard string slicing methods, other approaches could be considered: 1. **Using a library**: A dedicated string manipulation library like jQuery or Lodash could provide optimized and feature-rich string slicing functionality. 2. **Using regular expressions**: Regular expressions can be used to extract substrings from strings, but this approach may be slower than the standard string slicing methods. 3. **Using a buffer-based implementation**: For large strings, using a buffer-based implementation might offer better performance compared to the standard string slicing methods. In conclusion, the benchmark provides a clear comparison of the performance of three native JavaScript string slicing methods: `slice()`, `substr()`, and `substring()`. While each method has its pros and cons, `slice()` is generally considered the fastest approach due to its direct access to the underlying string's internal buffer.
Related benchmarks
slice vs substr vs substring with end
slice vs substr vs substring (with end index) @fran
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?