Benchmark: Date.toLocaleDateString vs Date.toDateStringfds

Tests:

Date().toDateString()
const x = new Date().toDateString();
Date().toLocaleDateString()
const x = new Date().toLocaleDateString();
Date().getDate()
const x = new Date().getDate();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Date().toDateString()
Date().toLocaleDateString()
Date().getDate()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/119.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 119 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Date().toDateString()	3016176.8 Ops/sec
Date().toLocaleDateString()	1128565.5 Ops/sec
Date().getDate()	6387306.0 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 and Script Preparation Code**

The provided JSON defines a benchmark with two test cases: `Date().toDateString()` and `Date().toLocaleDateString()`. The script preparation code is empty, which means that the benchmark creator has not provided any custom initialization or setup code for the tests.

Since there's no script preparation code, we'll assume that the JavaScript engine being tested is in its default state. This might be a deliberate choice to isolate the impact of specific libraries, syntax features, or other factors on performance.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare the following options:

1. `toDateString()`: A legacy method for formatting dates as strings.
2. `toLocaleDateString()`: A modern method for formatting dates as strings, with better support for different locales and date formats.

These options are compared to determine which one is faster, which might be useful when working with dates in JavaScript applications.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each option:

1. `toDateString()`:
	* Pros: Simple, widely supported, and easy to use.
	* Cons: Can lead to inconsistent formatting across different browsers and locales.
2. `toLocaleDateString()`:
	* Pros: More powerful, flexible, and locale-aware, making it a good choice for modern applications.
	* Cons: May be slower than `toDateString()`, depending on the JavaScript engine.

**Library: Intl.DateTimeFormat**

The `toLocaleDateString()` method uses the `Intl.DateTimeFormat` API to format dates. This library is part of the ECMAScript Internationalization API (ECMAScript 2019) and provides a standardized way to handle dates, numbers, and other numeric values in different locales.

When using `toLocaleDateString()`, the JavaScript engine will attempt to determine the user's preferred locale and use it to format the date. This can lead to more consistent and culturally relevant formatting across different browsers and devices.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these benchmark definitions.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to benchmark other date-related methods, such as `getTime()`, `getUTCDate()`, or `setDate()`, MeasureThat.net allows you to add more test cases to the benchmark. You can also experiment with different browsers, devices, and operating systems to see how they affect performance.

Some examples of alternative benchmarks might include:

* Comparing `toDateString()` and `toLocaleDateString()` in a specific locale (e.g., "Date().toDateString() in en-US" vs. "Date().toLocaleDateString() in en-US")
* Benchmarking the performance of different date formatting methods, such as using templates literal syntax or regex patterns
* Measuring the impact of various locales or currencies on date formatting and parsing performance

Feel free to explore these possibilities and create more benchmarks to help optimize your JavaScript applications!

Related benchmarks:

Date.toLocaleDateString vs Date.toDateStringfds (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Date().toDateString() vs Date().toLocaleDateString() vs Date().getDate()

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Date().toDateString()

Date().toLocaleDateString()

Date().getDate()

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):