Benchmark: luxon vs datefns

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/luxon@1.22.0/build/global/luxon.min.js" integrity="sha256-9nOzQsMIG12Bislqz+VUSDS8iyP0q4iCy1FfzoRvbXY=" crossorigin="anonymous"></script>
<script src="https://igor.moomers.org/random/datefns.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

window.ds = "2020-02-19T00:51:53.623839+00:00";

Tests:

datefns
window.datefns.parseISO(window.ds)
luxon
luxon.DateTime.fromISO(ds);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
datefns
luxon

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 YaBrowser/24.12.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Yandex Browser 24 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
datefns	845473.6 Ops/sec
luxon	510619.6 Ops/sec

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 and explore what's being tested on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two libraries: Luxon and Datefns, both used for date and time manipulation in JavaScript. The test case involves parsing a specific ISO-formatted string using each library.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Luxon**: A modern, open-source date and time library that provides a simple and intuitive API for working with dates.
2. **Datefns**: A lightweight, high-performance date manipulation library designed to be fast and easy to use.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* Luxon:
	+ Pros: Modern design, robust feature set, good documentation, and actively maintained.
	+ Cons: May have a steeper learning curve due to its more complex API.
* Datefns:
	+ Pros: Extremely lightweight, simple API, and high performance.
	+ Cons: Less modern design, fewer features compared to Luxon, and less active maintenance.

**Library Description**

Both libraries are used for date and time manipulation in JavaScript. Here's a brief overview of each:

1. **Luxon**: Luxon provides a comprehensive set of tools for working with dates and times, including parsing ISO-formatted strings.
2. **Datefns**: Datefns offers a simple, lightweight API for common date and time operations.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided code sets up the test environment by:

1. Defining a string `ds` with an ISO-formatted date string.
2. Including Luxon's global script in the HTML, making its functionality available for testing.
3. Including Datefns' script from a CDN.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring other libraries or alternatives for date and time manipulation in JavaScript, consider:

1. **Moment.js**: A popular, widely-used library with an extensive feature set, but known for its performance issues.
2. **Day.js**: Another lightweight library that offers an easy-to-use API and high performance.
3. **JS Date**: A simple, lightweight library that provides basic date and time functionality.

Keep in mind that the choice of library often depends on your specific project requirements, personal preference, and familiarity with each library's API.

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

Related benchmarks:

luxon vs datefns (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: datefns vs luxon

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

datefns

luxon

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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