Benchmark: Concatenation vs Interpolation

Script Preparation code:

var pages = 0;
var page = 1;
var s = "";
var clave_sitio = "editar";
var  str = ''
var params = {};
params.page = 0;
var clas = page == 1 ? "active" : "no";

Tests:

Contatenation
str += '<li class="' + clas + '"><a href="/cupones/seo/sitio/' + clave_sitio + '/p/1?s=' + s + '">First</a></li>' for (var p = 1; p <= pages; p++) { params.page = p clas = page == p ? "active" : "no" str += '<li class="' + clas + '"><a href="/cupones/seo/sitio/' + clave_sitio + '/p/' + params.page + '?s=' + s + '">' + p + '</a></li>' } params.page = --p clas = page == params.page ? "active" : "no" str += '<li class="' + clas + '"><a href="/cupones/seo/sitio/' + clave_sitio + '/p/' + params.page + '?s=' + s + '">Last</a></li>'
Interpolation
var pages = 0; var page = 1; var s = ""; var clave_sitio = "editar"; var str = '' var params = {}; params.page = 0; var clas = page == 1 ? "active" : "no"; str += `<li class="${clas}"><a href="/cupones/seo/sitio/${clave_sitio}/p/1?s=${s}">First</a></li>` for (var p = 1; p <= pages; p++) { params.page = p clas = page == p ? "active" : "no" str += `<li class="${clas}"><a href="/cupones/seo/sitio/${clave_sitio}/p/${params.page}?s=${s}">${p}</a></li>` } params.page = --p clas = page == params.page ? "active" : "no" str += `<li class="${clas}"><a href="/cupones/seo/sitio/${clave_sitio}/p/${params.page}?s=${s}">Last</a></li>`

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Contatenation
Interpolation

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net!

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: concatenation and interpolation when building HTML strings.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code sets up variables that are used in both test cases:

* `pages`: The number of pages (initialized to 0)
* `page`: The current page (initialized to 1)
* `s`: An empty string
* `clave_sitio`: A fixed string "editar"
* `str`: An empty string
* `params`: An object that stores the page number and other settings

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means that the benchmark focuses solely on building the HTML strings.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Concatenation**: This test case uses concatenation to build the HTML string. The `str` variable is appended with a new element for each page, using the `+=` operator.
2. **Interpolation**: This test case uses interpolation to build the HTML string. The `str` variable is populated with placeholders that are replaced with actual values using template literals (e.g., `${clas}`).

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Concatenation**:
	+ Pros: Easy to read and write, no special syntax required.
	+ Cons: Can lead to performance issues due to the repeated concatenation of strings.
* **Interpolation**:
	+ Pros: More efficient than concatenation, as it avoids creating temporary string objects.
	+ Cons: Requires support for template literals, which may not be present in all browsers or environments.

**Template Literals**

In the interpolation test case, template literals are used to build the HTML string. Template literals are a feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) that allow you to embed expressions inside strings using backticks (`). The `str` variable is populated with placeholders, which are replaced with actual values using `${expression}`.

**Other Considerations**

When building large numbers of elements, concatenation can lead to performance issues due to the repeated creation and disposal of temporary string objects. Interpolation, on the other hand, can be more efficient as it avoids creating these temporary objects.

**Alternative Approaches**

There are a few alternative approaches that could be used to build HTML strings:

* **String.replace()**: Instead of concatenation or interpolation, you could use the `replace()` method to replace placeholders with actual values.
* **StringBuilder**: In some JavaScript engines (e.g., V8), `StringBuilder` is available as a built-in class. You can use this to efficiently build large strings.

However, these alternatives may not be supported by all browsers or environments, so interpolation using template literals remains a popular choice.

I hope this explanation helps you understand the benchmark and its test cases!

Related benchmarks:

Concatenation vs Interpolation (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Contatenation vs Interpolation

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Contatenation

Interpolation

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):