Benchmark: JSON.parse vs string.splitn

Script Preparation code:

var array = new Array(9999999).fill('1').map(() => Math.random().toString());
var str = JSON.stringify(array);

Tests:

JSON.parse
JSON.parse(str);
String.split
str.split(',')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON.parse
String.split

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Sumamry (model llama3.2:3b, generated yesterday):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case on the MeasureThat.net website. Here's an explanation of what's being tested and the options being compared:

**What is being tested?**

Two different approaches are being compared: `JSON.parse(str)` and `str.split(',')`.

**Options being compared:**

1. **JSON.parse**: A built-in JavaScript method that parses a JSON string into a JavaScript object.
2. **String.split**: A built-in JavaScript method that splits a string into an array of substrings based on a specified separator.

**Pros and Cons:**

**JSON.parse**:

Pros:

* Efficient for parsing complex JSON data structures
* Can handle errors and warnings more easily than `string.split`

Cons:

* Can be slower for very large input strings due to the overhead of creating a new object
* May use more memory to store the parsed object

**String.split**:

Pros:

* Generally faster for simple string splitting tasks
* Does not require additional memory to store the split array

Cons:

* Can be slower and less efficient than `JSON.parse` for complex JSON data structures
* Can lead to errors if the input string is malformed or missing the separator

**Other considerations:**

Both methods can be affected by factors like browser caching, version differences, and device performance. The test case also uses a pseudo-randomly generated input string (`array = new Array(9999999).fill('1').map(() => Math.random().toString());`) to minimize variations in execution time.

**Library usage:**

There is no external library used in this benchmarking test case.

**Special JS features or syntax:**

None mentioned. The test cases only use standard JavaScript methods and syntax.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives for string parsing could include:

1. **Regex**: Using regular expressions to split strings.
2. **DOMParser**: Using the `DOMParser` API to parse JSON data.
3. **String.prototype.replace() with a separator**: Replacing all occurrences of the separator with an empty string and then converting the result to an array.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics or use cases, and may not be suitable for all situations.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JSON.parse	0.7 Ops/sec
String.split	1.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

JSON.parse vs string.splitn (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JSON.parse vs String.split

Created: 2 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JSON.parse

String.split

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Sumamry (model llama3.2:3b, generated yesterday):