Benchmark: ISO-Date slice vs split

Tests:

slice
const date = new Date().toISOString() const sliceDate = date.slice(0, 10)
split
const date = new Date().toISOString() const splitDate = date.split("T")[0]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
slice
split

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the provided benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark, created on MeasureThat.net, is designed to compare two approaches for extracting date strings from JavaScript's `Date` object: using the `slice()` method or the `split()` method. The benchmark aims to measure which approach is faster in terms of executing instructions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond).

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is represented by a JSON object containing:

* `Name`: a unique name for the benchmark
* `Description`: an optional description for the benchmark, which is empty in this case
* `Script Preparation Code`: an optional code snippet that should be executed before running the benchmark, which is also empty in this case
* `Html Preparation Code`: another optional code snippet that should be executed before running the benchmark, with no content

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two test cases:

1. **"slice"`**: This test case uses the `slice()` method to extract the first 10 characters from the ISO-formatted date string generated by `Date().toISOString()`.
2. **"split"`**: This test case uses the `split()` method with a regular expression to split the ISO-formatted date string into two parts, effectively extracting only the date part (before "T").

**Library and Purpose**

Neither of these methods relies on any external libraries. The `slice()` method is a built-in JavaScript function that extracts a subset of characters from a string, while the `split()` method with a regular expression extracts a substring based on the specified pattern.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There are no specific special features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to use alternative approaches for extracting date strings, some options could be:

* Using template literals: `const date = new Date().toISOString(); const datePart = `${date.slice(0, 10)}`;`
* Using regex with `match()`: `const date = new Date().toISOString(); const match = date.match(/^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}/); const datePart = match[0];`

However, these alternatives might not be as efficient or straightforward as the original approach using `slice()` and `split()`, which is why they are less commonly used.

**Pros and Cons**

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

* **`slice()`**: Pros: simple, fast, widely supported. Cons: may not work correctly for all date formats.
* **`split()` with regular expression**: Pros: flexible, works with most date formats. Cons: slightly slower than `slice()`, requires more memory.

In conclusion, the original approach using `slice()` and `split()` is a good choice for extracting date strings from JavaScript's `Date` object due to its simplicity, speed, and widespread support.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/110.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 110 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
slice	1183015.1 Ops/sec
split	971382.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

ISO-Date slice vs split (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: slice vs split

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

slice

split

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):