Benchmark: Date Split or Slice

Script Preparation code:

var date = new Date().toISOString();

Tests:

split
date.split('T');
slice
date.slice(0, 10);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
split
slice

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/15.5 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 15 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
split	10613743.0 Ops/sec
slice	21314866.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition for testing the performance of two specific operations: `date.split('T')` and `date.slice(0, 10)`. These operations are applied to a date string created using the `Date()` constructor and its `toISOString()` method.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **`date.split('T')`**: This operation splits the date string at the 'T' character (which represents the time zone separator in ISO 8601 format) into two substrings: the date part and the time part.
2. **`date.slice(0, 10)`**: This operation extracts a subset of characters from the original date string, starting from index 0 and ending at index 10.

**Pros and Cons**

Both approaches have their trade-offs:

* **`date.split('T')`**:
	+ Pros: Simple and straightforward. It creates two separate substrings, which can be useful for further processing.
	+ Cons: May create an additional DOM node or string buffer, depending on the browser's implementation.
* **`date.slice(0, 10)`**:
	+ Pros: More efficient than `split()`, as it only creates a new substring without creating intermediate nodes or buffers. It also avoids the overhead of parsing the date string separately.
	+ Cons: May be slower for very large date strings due to the slicing operation.

In general, if you need to process individual components of a date string (e.g., extracting the date part), `date.split('T')` might be a better choice. However, if you need to perform further processing on a subset of characters from the original string (e.g., extracting the first 10 characters), `date.slice(0, 10)` is likely a more efficient option.

**Library and Purpose**

In this benchmark, there is no specific library used. The `Date` constructor and its methods (`toISOString()`, `split()`, and `slice()`) are part of the built-in JavaScript API.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

The use of `var date = new Date().toISOString();` in the Script Preparation Code demonstrates the use of the `Date` constructor and its `toISOString()` method, which is a modern feature introduced in ECMAScript 5.1 (2011). This syntax allows creating a new `Date` object and immediately converting it to an ISO 8601-formatted string.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to benchmark similar operations or explore other aspects of JavaScript performance, MeasureThat.net offers a wide range of benchmarks covering various topics, such as:

* Array manipulation
* Object iteration
* Regular expressions
* DOM manipulation
* Event handling
* and more

Keep in mind that the specific benchmark results may vary depending on the browser, device, and platform used. MeasureThat.net provides a valuable resource for JavaScript developers to compare performance across different browsers and devices.

Related benchmarks:

Date Split or Slice (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: split vs slice

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

split

slice

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):