var t = new Date()
new Date(t.getTime())
new Date(t.getYear(), t.getMonth(), t.getDate())
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
getTime | |
getYear |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
getTime | 11899710.0 Ops/sec |
getYear | 3460496.2 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the provided benchmark and its test cases.
Benchmark Overview
The benchmark, named "Date clone test", measures the performance difference between creating a new Date object by using either the getTime()
method or the getYear()
, getMonth()
, and getDate()
methods. The benchmark aims to determine which approach is faster for cloning a Date object.
Script Preparation Code
The script preparation code initializes a new Date object, t
, with the current date and time using var t = new Date()
. This sets up the starting point for the benchmark.
Html Preparation Code
The html preparation code is empty (null
), indicating that no additional HTML setup is required before running the benchmark.
Test Cases
There are two individual test cases:
new Date(t.getTime())
.new Date(t.getYear(), t.getMonth(), t.getDate())
.Options Compared
The two options being compared are:
t.getTime()
to get the timestamp value and then creates a new Date object with this timestamp.t
and then passes these values to create a new Date object.Pros and Cons
Library Usage
The benchmark uses no external libraries. It relies solely on built-in JavaScript methods to create Date objects.
Special JS Features or Syntax
There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. However, it does use the getTime()
method, which is a standard feature of the Date object. No additional context is required to understand its usage.
Other Alternatives
Alternative approaches for creating Date objects might include:
luxon
or date-fns
, which offer alternative methods for working with dates in JavaScript.Overall, the benchmark focuses on comparing two common approaches to creating Date objects in JavaScript and provides a simple test bed for evaluating performance differences between these alternatives.