Benchmark: test test - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

single quote
const a = '';
template string
const a = ``;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
single quote
template string

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches: using single quotes (`'')` and template strings (````). The benchmark creates a simple JavaScript expression `const a = '';` (or `const a = ``;`) and measures how long it takes for each approach to execute.

**Options Compared**

There are only two options being compared:

1. Single quotes (`''`)
2. Template strings (````)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Single Quotes (`''`)**

Pros:

* Simple and widely supported by most browsers and JavaScript engines.
* Easy to read and write.

Cons:

* Can lead to issues with string concatenation, as seen in the benchmark code `const a = '';`. In older browsers, this might cause unexpected behavior due to caching of the string literal.

**Template Strings (````)**

Pros:

* Provide an efficient way to create multiline strings.
* Support for template literals (e.g., `${expression}`) allows for more expressive and readable code.

Cons:

* Not supported by all older browsers or JavaScript engines, which might lead to compatibility issues.
* Can be less readable for simple string literals if not used carefully.

**Library Usage**

In the provided benchmark, there is no explicit library usage. However, it's worth noting that template strings are a part of the ECMAScript standard (ES6), so all modern JavaScript engines and browsers support them natively.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JS feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The code `const a = '';` is a simple string literal, and both single quotes and template strings are being compared in a straightforward manner.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to test other approaches, here are some alternatives:

* Using backticks (`) instead of double quotes ("") for template literals.
* Comparing the performance of different JavaScript engines (e.g., V8 vs. SpiderMonkey).
* Testing the performance of string concatenation using various methods (e.g., `+`, `.concat()`, etc.).
* Measuring the performance of more complex expressions or loops.

Keep in mind that adding new test cases can make the benchmark more complex and harder to maintain.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_12_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/60.0.3112.90 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 60 on Mac OS X 10.12.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
single quote	620274624.0 Ops/sec
template string	620804736.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: single quote vs template string

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

single quote

template string

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):