Benchmark: args stringify vs join vs toString 2

Script Preparation code:

var arr = ['123', undefined, false, 'abc', 0, 'flex', 'flex-row', 0, 'items-center justify-center', undefined, undefined, false];

Tests:

stringify
JSON.stringify(arr)
join
arr.filter(Boolean).join(' ')
toString
arr.toString()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
stringify
join
toString

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The provided JSON defines a single benchmark, named "args stringify vs join vs toString 2". This benchmark is designed to measure the performance of three different approaches for stringifying an array of values:

1. `JSON.stringify(arr)`
2. `arr.filter(Boolean).join(' ')`
3. `arr.toString()`

**Script Preparation Code:**

The script preparation code provides an example array, `var arr = ['123', undefined, false, 'abc', 0, 'flex', 'flex-row', 0, 'items-center justify-center', undefined, undefined, false];`. This array contains various types of values, including strings, numbers, booleans, and null/undefined.

**Html Preparation Code:**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, which means the benchmark does not involve any DOM-related operations or rendering.

**Test Cases:**

The test cases are defined as an array of objects, each containing:

1. `Benchmark Definition`: The actual JavaScript expression to be measured (e.g., `"JSON.stringify(arr)"`).
2. `Test Name`: A descriptive name for the test case (e.g., `"stringify"`).

There are three test cases in total: "stringify", "join", and "toString".

**Options Compared:**

The benchmark compares the performance of three different approaches:

1. **JSON.stringify**: Uses the built-in `JSON.stringify()` method to stringify the array.
2. **Array.join()**: Uses the `join()` method on an array with a string separator (`' '`) to create a new string.
3. **toString()**: Uses the `toString()` method on the array object itself.

**Pros and Cons:**

Here's a brief overview of each approach:

1. **JSON.stringify**:
	* Pros: Widely supported, efficient, and concise way to stringify arrays.
	* Cons: Can be slower for large arrays due to overhead from parsing and escaping data.
2. **Array.join()**:
	* Pros: Flexible, can handle custom separators, and might be faster for small arrays.
	* Cons: May not work as expected with certain types of values (e.g., NaN), and can lead to inconsistent results if separator is not properly configured.
3. **toString()**:
	* Pros: Simple, lightweight, and suitable for most cases.
	* Cons: Might not be the most efficient or readable way to stringify arrays.

**Library/Functionality Used:**

None of the test cases explicitly use a library or function that requires external dependencies.

**Special JS Features/Syntax:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in the benchmark. However, it's worth noting that `Boolean` is an implicit boolean context in JavaScript (true == 1, false == 0), which might be exploited by some optimizations.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives to measure this performance might include:

* Using a different data structure, such as a string or a buffer
* Adding additional values to the array to increase its size
* Changing the separator in `Array.join()` to optimize for specific use cases
* Using a custom implementation of `JSON.stringify()`
* Profiling the benchmark using a tool like V8 Inspector (Chrome DevTools)

Keep in mind that each alternative would require modifications to the benchmark definition and test cases.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/125.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 125 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
stringify	2061854.9 Ops/sec
join	1909383.8 Ops/sec
toString	2511506.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

args stringify vs join vs toString 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: stringify vs join vs toString

Created: 5 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

stringify

join

toString

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):