Benchmark: Try/catch performance (JSON parse SM Edition)

HTML Preparation code:

<div id="test"></div>

Tests:

Try/catch
function jParse() { JSON.parse('{"name":"John", "age":31, "city":"New York"}'); } try { jParse(); } catch(error) { console.log(error); }
Without try/catch
JSON.parse('{"name":"John", "age":31, "city":"New York"}');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Try/catch
Without try/catch

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/112.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 112 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Try/catch	2434842.5 Ops/sec
Without try/catch	2673861.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a platform for measuring JavaScript performance, specifically microbenchmarks that can help identify performance bottlenecks in code. The provided benchmark measures the performance of two approaches: executing JSON parsing with try-catch blocks versus without them.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two test cases:

1. **Try/catch**: This test case executes a function `jParse` that calls `JSON.parse` inside a try-catch block. The catch block logs any errors to the console.
2. **Without try/catch**: This test case only executes the `JSON.parse` call without any try-catch block.

**Library and Purpose**

The `JSON.parse` method is part of the built-in JavaScript object prototype, specifically in the ECMAScript 5 (ES5) standard. It's used to parse a JSON string into a JavaScript object. In this benchmark, both test cases use `JSON.parse`, but with different error handling approaches.

**Special JS Features**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the provided code. However, it's worth noting that modern browsers and JavaScript engines often implement various optimizations and features that can affect performance, such as:

* Just-In-Time (JIT) compilation
* Ahead-of-Time (AOT) compilation
* Garbage collection
* Web workers

**Benchmark Analysis**

Here's a brief analysis of the two test cases:

1. **Try/catch**: With try-catch block:
	* Pros: Can catch and handle errors, providing more robust error handling.
	* Cons: May introduce additional overhead due to exception handling, which can lead to slower performance.
2. **Without try/catch**: Without error handling:
	* Pros: Typically faster since there's no overhead from exception handling.
	* Cons: Will throw an error if the `JSON.parse` call fails, and this error will not be caught or handled.

**Results Interpretation**

The benchmark results show that executing `JSON.parse` without try-catch block is slightly faster (2434842.5 executions per second) compared to using try-catch blocks (2673861.0 executions per second). However, it's essential to consider the trade-off between performance and error handling when choosing this approach.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need more control over error handling or want to measure performance in different scenarios, you can explore other approaches:

* Using `try-catch` blocks with custom error handling mechanisms (e.g., logging, retrying).
* Implementing your own error handling functions instead of relying on built-in `try-catch` blocks.
* Measuring the performance of different JSON parsing libraries or implementations.

In general, when choosing between try-catch and no try-catch approaches, consider factors such as:

* Performance requirements
* Error handling needs
* Code complexity and readability

This benchmark can serve as a starting point to evaluate these considerations in your own code.

Related benchmarks:

Try/catch performance (JSON parse SM Edition) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Try/catch vs Without try/catch

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Try/catch

Without try/catch

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):