Benchmark: Date Constructors

Tests:

Unit Parameter Constructor
new Date(1970, 0);
Millisecond Parameter Constructor
new Date(0);
String Constructor
new Date('1970-01-01');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Unit Parameter Constructor
Millisecond Parameter Constructor
String Constructor

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case defined on MeasureThat.net. The test case is focused on comparing different approaches for creating `Date` objects in JavaScript. There are three individual test cases:

1. **Unit Parameter Constructor**: Tests the creation of a `Date` object using only numeric parameters (year, month, and day).
2. **Millisecond Parameter Constructor**: Tests the creation of a `Date` object using only milliseconds as an argument.
3. **String Constructor**: Tests the creation of a `Date` object using a string representation in the format `YYYY-MM-DD`.

**Options Compared**

The three test cases compare different approaches to create `Date` objects:

* The first two test cases (`Unit Parameter Constructor` and `Millisecond Parameter Constructor`) use built-in JavaScript functions for creating `Date` objects, which accept numeric parameters.
* The third test case (`String Constructor`) uses a string representation of the date in the format `YYYY-MM-DD`, which is also a valid way to create a `Date` object.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

1. **Unit Parameter Constructor**: This approach is simple and efficient, but it only works correctly when passing numeric values for year, month, and day. If any of these values are out of range (e.g., February 31), the resulting date will be incorrect.
2. **Millisecond Parameter Constructor**: This approach is also efficient and can handle large dates accurately. However, if the input milliseconds exceed the maximum value that can be represented by a JavaScript `Date` object (approximately 253402325379.8 days or October 15, 2038, at 03:14:07 UTC), it will wrap around to a negative value.
3. **String Constructor**: This approach is more flexible and allows for any valid date string in the format `YYYY-MM-DD`. However, it may be slower than the other two approaches due to the overhead of parsing the string.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark results are based on measurements using Chrome 98 on a Windows Desktop. It's essential to note that different browsers and platforms may produce varying results.
* The use of JavaScript libraries like `moment.js` or `date-fns` can provide more accurate date calculations, but they might also introduce additional overhead.

**Libraries Used**

None of the provided benchmark test cases explicitly uses any external libraries. However, if you choose to use a library for date-related calculations, some popular options include:

* `moment.js`: A widely used JavaScript library for working with dates and times.
* `date-fns`: A lightweight JavaScript library that provides utility functions for working with dates.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark test cases. However, it's worth noting that some newer JavaScript features like `BigInt` support arbitrary-precision arithmetic, which might be relevant when dealing with very large date values.

In summary, the MeasureThat.net benchmark provides a useful comparison of different approaches for creating `Date` objects in JavaScript. Understanding the pros and cons of each approach will help you choose the best method for your specific use case.

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/98.0.4758.102 Safari/537.36 Edg/98.0.1108.56

Browser/OS: Chrome 98 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Unit Parameter Constructor	945007.8 Ops/sec
Millisecond Parameter Constructor	1974164.5 Ops/sec
String Constructor	1077216.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Date Constructors (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: Unit Parameter Constructor vs Millisecond Parameter Constructor vs String Constructor

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Unit Parameter Constructor

Millisecond Parameter Constructor

String Constructor

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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