Benchmark: Date comparison - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var x = new Date('2020-05-01');
var y = new Date('2020-05-01');

Tests:

Simple
var diff = x.getFullYear() === y.getFullYear() && x.getMonth() === y.getMonth() && x.getDate() === y.getDate();
toISOString()
var diff2 = x.toISOString().substr(0, 10) === y.toISOString().substr(0, 10);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Simple
toISOString()

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.

I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of JavaScript date comparisons in different ways.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates two `Date` objects, `x` and `y`, with the same date value (`2020-05-01`). This ensures that the dates are identical for comparison.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition consists of two test cases:

1. **Simple**: Compares if the year, month, and day of `x` and `y` are equal using three separate assignments.
2. **toISOString()**: Compares if the first 10 characters of the ISO string representation of `x` and `y` are equal.

**Comparison Options**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Assignment-based comparison** (Simple): Compares individual year, month, and day values using separate assignments.
	* Pros: Simple to understand and implement, provides detailed information about each component's value.
	* Cons: May involve more operations than necessary, as the comparisons are done individually.
2. **ISO string representation comparison** (toISOString()): Compares the first 10 characters of the ISO string representation of `x` and `y`.
	* Pros: Can be faster, as it only compares a subset of the date values.
	* Cons: May not provide detailed information about each component's value, as only the first 10 characters are compared.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in this benchmark. However, JavaScript's built-in `Date` object and string manipulation functions (`substr`) are used.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative comparison approaches could be:

* Using a single comparison function that combines the year, month, and day values (e.g., `x.getFullYear() === y.getFullYear()` && x.getMonth() === y.getMonth() && x.getDate() === y.getDate()).
* Using a more modern date parsing library like Moment.js or Luxon.
* Comparing dates in a specific format (e.g., `YYYY-MM-DD`) instead of the default ISO format.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be as simple to understand and implement as the assignment-based comparison approach used in this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Date comparison (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Simple vs toISOString()

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Simple

toISOString()

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):