Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
string_concat_19oq287398127398127398123
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
direct concat vs array concat
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
direct concat
let result = ""; for (let q = 0; q < 1000000; ++q) { result += "" + q; }
array concat
let result = []; for (let q = 0; q < 1000000; ++q) { result.push("" + q); } result.join("");
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
direct concat
array concat
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 break down the JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net. **What is being tested?** The benchmark tests two different ways to concatenate strings in JavaScript: 1. **Direct Concat**: This approach uses the `+` operator to concatenate two strings, e.g., `"hello" + "world"`. 2. **Array Concat**: This approach creates an array and pushes individual elements (strings) onto it, then joins the entire array into a single string using the `join()` method. **Options being compared** The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches: Pros and Cons: * **Direct Concat**: + Pros: Simple, intuitive, and widely supported. + Cons: Can lead to unexpected behavior if not used carefully (e.g., concatenating numbers or objects), and can be less efficient than using arrays for large strings. * **Array Concat**: + Pros: More flexible and efficient for large strings, as it avoids creating intermediate strings. However, it requires creating an array, which can have overhead. + Cons: May require more memory allocation and garbage collection. **Other considerations** Both approaches have some nuances: * In the `array concat` approach, using `join()` requires specifying a separator (empty string in this case), which might not be desirable if you only need to concatenate strings without separators. * Both approaches assume that the input data is already available; if you're generating random data or parsing from external sources, that will add additional complexity. **Libraries and special JS features** The benchmark doesn't use any libraries specifically for string concatenation. However, it does use JavaScript's built-in `push()` method on arrays and the `join()` method to concatenate strings. **Special JS feature** There is no mention of any special JavaScript features or syntax that are not standard (ECMAScript). If you wanted to test a feature like `let` declarations, arrow functions, or template literals, it would be necessary to modify the benchmark definition accordingly. **Alternatives** If you want to write your own microbenchmarking tool similar to MeasureThat.net, consider the following alternatives: * Use a testing framework like Jest, Mocha, or Cypress, which provide built-in support for running benchmarks. * Utilize libraries like Benchmark.js, which offer more advanced features and customization options for benchmarking code. * Implement a simple loop-based benchmarking mechanism using Node.js's `process` module and timing functions (e.g., `process.hrtime()`) to measure execution times.
Related benchmarks:
Template strings vs. String.concat
Template strings vs. String.concat v2
Template strings vs. String.concat, v2
string concat: concat vs +
string_concat_vs_append
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?