Benchmark: JSON.parse vs string.split - cognito groups

Script Preparation code:

var groups = "[\"cip-assign-license-users\",\"gtpc-team-all\"]";
var groupsString = "cip-assign-license-users,gtpc-team-all";

Tests:

JSON.parse
JSON.parse(groups);
String.split
groupsString.split(',')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON.parse
String.split

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; CrOS x86_64 14541.0.0) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/110.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 110 on Chrome OS 14541.0.0

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JSON.parse	2512630.2 Ops/sec
String.split	7045844.5 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 benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches: `JSON.parse()` and `string.split()`. The test case uses a fixed string `groups` that contains comma-separated values, which are then parsed using both methods. The goal is to determine which method performs better in terms of execution speed.

**Options Being Compared**

* **JSON.parse()**: This method parses the input string into a JavaScript object. In this case, it's used to parse the `groups` string, which contains comma-separated values enclosed in double quotes.
* **string.split()**: This method splits the input string into an array of substrings based on a specified delimiter (in this case, the comma character). The resulting array is then returned.

**Pros and Cons**

* **JSON.parse()**:
	+ Pros: Can handle nested structures and provides a more readable way to represent data.
	+ Cons: May be slower for simple splitting tasks due to its parsing overhead.
* **string.split()**:
	+ Pros: Fast and efficient, ideal for simple splitting tasks.
	+ Cons: Limited to basic splitting scenarios and does not provide any meaningful results.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses a fixed string `groups` that contains comma-separated values. This ensures that the test case is deterministic and consistent across runs.
* Both methods are subject to browser-specific variations in performance, which is reflected in the benchmark's results.

**Library Used (if applicable)**

In this case, there is no explicit library used beyond the built-in `JSON` and `String` objects.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested here. The test case relies solely on standard JavaScript features.

**Benchmark Results Interpretation**

The benchmark results show that `string.split()` outperforms `JSON.parse()` in this specific scenario, with an execution speed of 7045844.5 executions per second compared to 2512630.25 executions per second for `JSON.parse()`. However, it's essential to note that these results are dependent on the browser and device used, as specified in the benchmark results.

**Alternative Approaches**

If you were to rewrite this benchmark or explore alternative approaches:

* Using a regex-based solution (`/,\s*/g`) might be an option for splitting the string.
* Another approach could involve using a library like Lodash, which provides a `split()` function that can handle more complex splitting scenarios.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

Related benchmarks:

JSON.parse vs string.split - cognito groups (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JSON.parse vs String.split

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JSON.parse

String.split

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):