Benchmark: hex "#" - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var hex = "#1e90ff" ; var result ;

Tests:

substring()
if(hex[0]=="#"){ result = hex.substring(1) }
slice()
if(hex[0]=="#"){ result = hex.slice(1) }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
substring()
slice()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help explain the JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark measures how fast two string slicing methods are: `substring()` and `slice()`. The input string is a hexadecimal value represented by `#1e90ff`.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code sets up the input string `hex` to `"#1e90ff"`, which is used as the input for both benchmarking functions.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code, so we'll assume that the test case is only concerned with the JavaScript implementation of the slicing methods.

**Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. `substring()`
2. `slice()`

Both test cases use a similar approach: they check if the first character of the input string `hex` is `#`, and if so, extract the substring from index 1 onwards using either `substring()` or `slice()`.

**Library Used**

In both test cases, a library is used to provide an instance of the Date object. Specifically:

* In the `substring()` test case, the `Date.now()` method is used.
* In the `slice()` test case, the `performance.now()` method is used.

These methods are built-in JavaScript functions that return the number of milliseconds since the Unix epoch (January 1, 1970).

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark. Both `substring()` and `slice()` are standard JavaScript string slicing methods.

**Pros and Cons of Different Approaches**

Here's a brief analysis of the pros and cons of using `substring()` versus `slice()`:

* **`substring()`**:
	+ Pros: Simple, widely supported, and efficient.
	+ Cons: May be slower than `slice()` for large strings due to its overhead.
* **`slice()`**:
	+ Pros: More flexible and powerful than `substring()`, with options for starting and ending indices.
	+ Cons: Not as widely supported as `substring()` and may have additional overhead.

In this benchmark, the results suggest that `slice()` is slightly faster than `substring()` on this specific test case.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to reimplement this benchmark, here are some alternative approaches you could consider:

* Use a more modern JavaScript string slicing method like `string.slice()`.
* Experiment with different browsers and versions to see how the results vary.
* Add additional input values or edge cases to test the robustness of the implementation.

Keep in mind that microbenchmarks can be sensitive to specific inputs, execution environments, and system conditions. The goal is to create a controlled environment for comparison, rather than replicating real-world performance scenarios exactly.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 115 on Windows 7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
substring()	46112104.0 Ops/sec
slice()	46194204.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

hex "#" (version: 0)

hex get rid '#"

Comparing performance of: substring() vs slice()

Created: 5 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

substring()

slice()

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):