Benchmark: JSON.parse & string.split

Script Preparation code:

var array = new Array(5000).fill([1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8])
var str = JSON.stringify(array);

Tests:

JSON.parse
JSON.parse(str);
String.split
str.split(',')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON.parse
String.split

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/106.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 106 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JSON.parse	1444.9 Ops/sec
String.split	1053.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its test cases.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of two JavaScript functions: `JSON.parse()` and `str.split()`. The script preparation code creates an array with 5000 elements, each containing an array, which is then stringified using `JSON.stringify()` to create a JSON representation. This JSON string is then used as input for both functions.

**Options Compared**

The two functions being compared are:

1. `JSON.parse(str)`: This function parses the given JSON string into a JavaScript object.
2. `str.split(',')`: This function splits the given string at each comma (`,`) character and returns an array of substrings.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**JSON.parse()**

Pros:

* Fast and efficient for parsing JSON data
* Can handle nested objects and arrays
* Native JavaScript function, so no additional libraries or overhead

Cons:

* May not be suitable for very large datasets, as it can lead to a stack overflow error
* Can throw errors if the input is invalid JSON

**str.split()**

Pros:

* Fast and efficient for string manipulation
* Can handle large datasets without significant performance degradation
* Native JavaScript function, so no additional libraries or overhead

Cons:

* Not designed specifically for parsing data, so may not be as efficient as `JSON.parse()`
* Requires a specific separator character (in this case, the comma `,`), which may not be suitable for all use cases

**Other Considerations**

Both functions have their own strengths and weaknesses. In general, if you need to parse structured JSON data, `JSON.parse()` is likely the better choice. However, if you're working with large datasets or need a simple string manipulation function, `str.split()` may be sufficient.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, no external libraries are used beyond the native JavaScript functions.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definition. The test cases only use standard JavaScript functions and variables.

**Alternative Benchmarks**

Other alternatives for measuring performance can include:

* Using a different input data structure, such as an object or a DOM element
* Adding additional functionality to the script preparation code, such as sorting or filtering the array
* Using a different browser or version of Chrome
* Increasing or decreasing the size of the dataset

Keep in mind that changing these parameters can affect the results and may not accurately represent real-world usage scenarios.

Related benchmarks:

JSON.parse & string.split (version: 0)

Mirror plot use case for more accurate measurements

Comparing performance of: JSON.parse vs String.split

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JSON.parse

String.split

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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