Benchmark: JSON.parse vs JSON.stringify 2

Script Preparation code:

var MyObject = {
    description: 'Creates a deep copy of source, which should be an object or an array.',
    myNumber: 123456789,
    myBoolean: true,
    jayson: {
        stringify: 'JSON.stringify() method converts a JavaScript value to a JSON string....',
        parse: 'JSON.parse() method parses a JSON string...'
    }
};

var MyString = JSON.stringify(MyObject)

Tests:

JSON.parse
JSON.parse(MyString)
JSON.stringify
JSON.stringify(MyObject)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON.parse
JSON.stringify

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between `JSON.parse()` and `JSON.stringify()` functions in JavaScript. Specifically, it tests two individual test cases:

1. `JSON.parse(MyString)`: This test case parses a JSON string created by calling `JSON.stringify(MyObject)` to an equivalent JavaScript object.
2. `JSON.stringify(MyObject)`: This test case serializes the `MyObject` JavaScript object to a JSON string.

**Options compared**

The benchmark compares two approaches:

1. **Deep copy**: Using `JSON.parse()` to parse the JSON string, which creates a deep copy of the original object.
2. **Shallow copy**: Using `JSON.stringify()` to serialize the `MyObject` JavaScript object, which creates a shallow copy (i.e., only copies the top-level properties).

**Pros and cons**

* **Deep copy (JSON.parse())**:
	+ Pros: Ensures that the parsed object is an exact clone of the original object, preserving all its properties and relationships.
	+ Cons: May be slower than shallow copying for large objects due to the overhead of creating a deep copy.
* **Shallow copy (JSON.stringify())**:
	+ Pros: Faster than deep copying, as it only copies the top-level properties of the object.
	+ Cons: Does not preserve all properties and relationships of the original object.

In general, if you need to create an exact clone of an object with complex relationships, using `JSON.parse()` might be a better choice. However, for simpler objects or when performance is critical, `JSON.stringify()` can be a faster option.

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's worth noting that both `JSON.parse()` and `JSON.stringify()` are built-in JavaScript functions that do not rely on external libraries.

**Special JS features/syntax**

None are mentioned explicitly, but it's worth noting that `JSON` objects and their related functions (e.g., `JSON.parse()`, `JSON.stringify()`) are part of the ECMAScript standard and are supported in most modern browsers and JavaScript engines.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 121 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JSON.parse	2191095.0 Ops/sec
JSON.stringify	3241318.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JSON.parse vs JSON.stringify 2 (version: 0)

JSON.parse vs JSON.stringify 2

Comparing performance of: JSON.parse vs JSON.stringify

Created: 9 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JSON.parse

JSON.stringify

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):