Benchmark: slice vs substring vs substr

Script Preparation code:

var example = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz,./;-==;[]5446621330789'.repeat(1000)

Tests:

slice
var slice = example.slice(5000);
substring
var substring = example.substring(5000);
substr
var substr = example.substr(5000)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
slice
substring
substr

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
slice	30787028.0 Ops/sec
substring	30871564.0 Ops/sec
substr	30880036.0 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 provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three string slicing methods in JavaScript: `slice()`, `substring()`, and `substr()`. The test case uses a large string (`example`) repeated 1000 times to simulate a real-world scenario. Each method is tested with a specific starting index (5000).

**String Slicing Methods**

1. **`slice()`**: This method returns a new string that includes the specified start and end indices. It's used as `example.slice(5000)`.
2. **`substring()`**: This method returns a new string that includes the characters between the specified start and end indices (exclusive). It's used as `example.substring(5000)`.
3. **`substr()`**: This method returns a new string that includes the specified number of characters starting from the specified index. It's used as `example.substr(5000)`.

**Comparison and Pros/Cons**

All three methods have their pros and cons:

*   **`slice()`**:
    *   **Pros:** Fast, efficient, and widely supported by modern browsers.
    *   **Cons:** Creates a new string object, which can lead to performance issues if the original string is large.
*   **`substring()`**:
    *   **Pros:** Also fast and efficient but creates a new string object as well. It's often preferred over `slice()` in older browsers or environments where `slice()` is not supported.
    *   **Cons:** Same as `slice()`: creates a new string object, leading to potential performance issues with large strings.
*   **`substr()`**:
    *   **Pros:** Some older JavaScript engines (e.g., V8 before 2015) were faster than the other two methods due to its ability to optimize certain cases. However, modern browsers have largely abandoned `substr()` in favor of `slice()` or `substring()`.
    *   **Cons:** Generally slower and less efficient than `slice()` and `substring()`, especially for large strings.

**Library and Special JS Feature**

None of the test cases use a library or any special JavaScript features beyond standard syntax. The benchmark only focuses on the performance differences between these three string slicing methods.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to string slicing include:

*   Using `indexOf()` with offset values to calculate slice positions.
*   Implementing custom string slicing algorithms (e.g., using bitwise operators).
*   Utilizing libraries like ICU or String-slicing plugins for optimized performance.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different trade-offs, such as additional complexity, compatibility issues, or overhead.

Related benchmarks:

slice vs substring vs substr (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: slice vs substring vs substr

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

slice

substring

substr

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):