Benchmark: json stringify vs array join (string) 2

Script Preparation code:

function moreData(arr, left) {
  if(left === 0) return arr;
  else {
    arr.push("Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing");
  	return moreData(arr, left - 1);
  }
}
function makeTestData() { return moreData([], 4); }

Tests:

join
makeTestData().sort().join('-')
JSON.stringify
JSON.stringify(makeTestData());

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
join
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 break down the provided benchmark and explain what is tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that represents a test case. In this case, there are two test cases:

1. "join" - This test case measures the performance of string concatenation using the `join()` method.
2. "JSON.stringify" - This test case measures the performance of serializing an object to a JSON string using the `JSON.stringify()` function.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code is a JavaScript function named `moreData` that creates a large array by pushing a fixed string (`Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing`) and recursively calling itself with decreasing increments. The `makeTestData` function is used to create an instance of this array for each test case.

**Options Compared**

The options compared in this benchmark are:

1. **String concatenation using the `join()` method**: This option uses a loop to concatenate strings together.
2. **JSON serialization using `JSON.stringify()`**: This option serializes the entire object to a JSON string.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**String Concatenation using `join()` Method:**

Pros:

* Can be faster for large arrays since it avoids creating temporary strings
* More straightforward to implement

Cons:

* May require more memory allocation due to array growth
* May have performance issues if the array is very large or if the concatenation string is too long

**JSON Serialization using `JSON.stringify()`:**

Pros:

* Can be faster for small to medium-sized objects since it avoids creating a new string
* More efficient in terms of memory usage

Cons:

* May require more CPU cycles to serialize the object
* May have performance issues if the object is very large or complex

**Other Considerations**

1. **Memory Allocation**: String concatenation using `join()` may allocate more memory due to array growth, while JSON serialization avoids creating a new string.
2. **CPU Cycles**: JSON serialization may require more CPU cycles due to its complexity, while string concatenation is generally faster.
3. **Cache Efficiency**: Both options can have cache efficiency issues, but the impact depends on the specific use case.

**Library Usage**

There doesn't appear to be any library usage in this benchmark. The `JSON` object and string methods are part of the standard JavaScript API.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None are explicitly used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the `join()` method uses a special syntax (`'-'` separator) to concatenate strings together.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for measuring performance in JavaScript benchmarks could include:

* Using `Array.prototype.map()` or `Array.prototype.reduce()` instead of string concatenation
* Comparing `String.prototype.replace()` or `String.prototype.slice()` with `join()`
* Measuring the performance of object iteration using `for...in` or `for...of`
* Evaluating the performance of different data structures, such as arrays, objects, or Maps.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 115 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
join	1630810.9 Ops/sec
JSON.stringify	1320586.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

json stringify vs array join (string) 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: join vs JSON.stringify

Created: 5 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

join

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):