Benchmark: json stringify vs string...ssss

Script Preparation code:

var vals = ["sasa", "baba"];

Tests:

strings
`{ name: "Matheus de Sousa Martins", age: 30, phone: "999999999999", val:["sasa", "baba"]}`
JSON.stringify
JSON.stringify({ name: "Matheus de Sousa Martins", age: 30, phone: "999999999999", val:vals });
string with values
`{ name: "Matheus de Sousa Martins", age: 30, phone: "999999999999", val:${vals}}`

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
strings
JSON.stringify
string with values

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/115.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 115 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
strings	888398016.0 Ops/sec
JSON.stringify	1550616.0 Ops/sec
string with values	4484985.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the provided JSON benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**
The JSON benchmark is used to compare the performance of three different approaches:

1. **String concatenation**: Creating strings using `+` operator or string interpolation (`${}`) with template literals.
2. **JSON.stringify**: Using the built-in `JSON.stringify()` function to convert an object to a string.
3. **String with values**: Using string interpolation (`${}`) with template literals, where the value is a variable (`vals`).

**Options Comparison**

* **Pros and Cons of String Concatenation**:
	+ Pros: Simple, widely supported, and works in most cases.
	+ Cons: Can lead to performance issues due to the creation of temporary strings, especially when concatenating multiple values.
* **Pros and Cons of JSON.stringify**:
	+ Pros: Provides a standardized way to convert objects to strings, which can be useful for data exchange or storage. It also handles more complex data types than simple string concatenation.
	+ Cons: Can lead to performance issues due to the overhead of serializing the entire object, especially for large or complex data structures. Additionally, it may not work correctly with all data types or edge cases.
* **Pros and Cons of String with Values**:
	+ Pros: Similar to JSON.stringify, but avoids the need to serialize the entire object. It also provides a more readable way to embed values in strings.
	+ Cons: May still lead to performance issues due to the creation of temporary strings, especially when dealing with large or complex data structures.

**Library Usage**
None of the test cases explicitly use any external libraries. However, it's worth noting that `vals` is assigned in the Script Preparation Code, which suggests that the tests are designed to work on a specific JavaScript context or environment.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**
The benchmark uses template literals with string interpolation (`${}`) and the `JSON.stringify()` function, which are both modern JavaScript features. However, since template literals were introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6), this benchmark may not be compatible with older JavaScript environments or versions.

**Alternative Approaches**

* **String concatenation**: Can be replaced with other string formatting methods, such as using a library like Moment.js for date and time formatting.
* **JSON.stringify**: Can be replaced with other serialization methods, such as using a library like JSON5 or UglifyJS to optimize the output.
* **String with Values**: Can be replaced with other interpolation methods, such as using string replace() or regex operations.

In summary, the benchmark provides a fair comparison of three different approaches for creating strings in JavaScript. While it highlights some potential performance issues with string concatenation and JSON.stringify, it also showcases the benefits of using template literals with string interpolation.

Related benchmarks:

json stringify vs string...ssss (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: strings vs JSON.stringify vs string with values

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

strings

JSON.stringify

string with values

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):