Benchmark: Ramda toString vs JSON.stringify

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = [{foo: {bar: {foo: {bar: ''}}}}, {}, {}];

Tests:

Ramda
var result = R.toString(data, [{foo: {bar: {foo: {bar: ''}}}}, {}, {}]);
JSON.stringify
var result = JSON.stringify(data) === JSON.stringify([{foo: {bar: {foo: {bar: ''}}}}, {}, {}]);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Ramda
JSON.stringify

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 10 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:122.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/122.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 122 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Ramda	95177.2 Ops/sec
JSON.stringify	1581000.2 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 explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares two approaches to convert JavaScript objects to strings: Ramda's `toString` function and the built-in `JSON.stringify` method.

**Options compared**

1. **Ramda's `toString`**: This is a utility function from the Ramda library that converts an object to a string. It's designed to work with functional programming concepts like immutable data structures.
2. **Built-in `JSON.stringify`**: This is a built-in JavaScript method that converts an object (or any value) to a JSON string.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Ramda's `toString`**:
	* Pros: Efficient, lightweight, and well-suited for functional programming use cases.
	* Cons: May be less intuitive or familiar to developers without experience with Ramda or functional programming concepts.
2. **Built-in `JSON.stringify`**:
	* Pros: Widely supported, easy to understand, and suitable for most use cases.
	* Cons: May produce larger strings due to the additional overhead of JSON formatting.

**Library usage**

The benchmark uses the Ramda library, which is a collection of reusable functions for functional programming. The `toString` function is specifically designed to work with complex data structures like nested objects.

**Special JavaScript features or syntax**

None mentioned in this specific benchmark, but it's worth noting that some benchmarks may test more advanced JavaScript features like async/await, Promises, or modern web APIs.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in alternative string conversion methods, here are a few examples:

* **String.prototype.concat()**: This method concatenates multiple strings together, which can be inefficient for large amounts of data.
* **Array.prototype.join()**: Similar to `concat()`, but it's specifically designed for joining arrays of strings.

These alternatives might be relevant in specific use cases, but they're not typically used as direct replacements for `JSON.stringify` or Ramda's `toString`.

In summary, this benchmark compares two efficient string conversion methods: Ramda's `toString` and the built-in `JSON.stringify`. The choice between these options depends on your specific requirements, familiarity with functional programming concepts, and performance needs.

Related benchmarks:

Ramda toString vs JSON.stringify (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Ramda vs JSON.stringify

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Ramda

JSON.stringify

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):