Benchmark: Simple time parsing

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/luxon/3.2.1/luxon.min.js'></script>

Tests:

array split
const time = '08:30:00' const processed = time.split(':').slice(0, -1).join(':') console.log('split: ', processed)
luxon
const time = '08:30:00' const processed = luxon.DateTime.fromFormat(time, 'hh:mm:ss').toFormat('hh:mm') console.log('luxon: ', processed)
string replace
const time = '08:30:00' const processed = time.replace(/:00$/, '') console.log('replace: ', processed)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array split
luxon
string replace

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/110.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 110 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
array split	34132.5 Ops/sec
luxon	16696.1 Ops/sec
string replace	30818.2 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare three approaches for parsing time strings: array splitting, string replacement using regular expressions, and using the Luxon library.

**Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. **Array Split**: This test case uses a simple string manipulation approach to parse the time string. The code splits the time string into an array of substrings using the colon (:) as a delimiter, then joins the array elements back together without the last element.
2. **Luxon**: This test case uses the Luxon library to parse the time string in two formats: the original format and a simplified format (hh:mm). The Luxon library provides a convenient way to work with dates and times, including formatting and parsing functions.
3. **String Replace**: This test case uses regular expressions to remove the last two digits of the time string.

**Library Used**

The Luxon library is used in Test Case 2. Luxon is a modern JavaScript date and time library that provides a simple and intuitive API for working with dates and times. It includes features like parsing, formatting, and manipulation of date and time values.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None are mentioned in the provided code or JSON. However, it's worth noting that the benchmark assumes the input time string is in a specific format (hh:mm:ss), which may not be universally supported across all JavaScript implementations.

**Comparison and Pros/Cons**

The three approaches have different strengths and weaknesses:

* **Array Split**: Simple and lightweight, but may not handle edge cases or non-standard time formats well. It can also lead to performance issues if the input string is very large.
* **Luxon**: Provides a convenient and robust way to parse and format dates and times, with built-in support for various formats and languages. However, it may have a slight overhead due to its additional dependencies and complexity.
* **String Replace**: Lightweight and easy to implement, but may not be as efficient or reliable as the other two approaches, especially when handling non-standard time formats.

**Benchmark Considerations**

When designing a benchmark like this, it's essential to consider factors such as:

* **Input variability**: The input time strings should cover various scenarios, including edge cases and non-standard formats.
* **Performance metrics**: The benchmark should measure the performance of each approach in terms of execution frequency per second (ExecutionsPerSecond).
* **Consistency**: Ensure that all test runs are consistent and reliable, with minimal variation between runs.

**Alternatives**

If you were to reimplement this benchmark or create a new one, consider using alternative approaches or libraries, such as:

* Using the built-in JavaScript Date object for parsing time strings.
* Employing more advanced string manipulation techniques, like RegExp anchoring or lookahead assertions.
* Utilizing other date and time libraries, like Moment.js or DayPilot.

These alternatives can provide different trade-offs in terms of performance, complexity, and reliability.

Related benchmarks:

Simple time parsing (version: 0)

Compare time parsing functions

Comparing performance of: array split vs luxon vs string replace

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array split

luxon

string replace

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):