Benchmark: Check Date contains time

Script Preparation code:

var d = new Date('2024-05-05')

Tests:

getTime
const time = d.getTime(); time % 10000 === 0 && time % 600000 === 0 && time % 36000000 === 0
getHours/Minutes/Seconds
d.getHours() === 0 && d.getMinutes() === 0 && d.getSeconds() === 0
setHours
d.getTime() === d.setHours(0,0,0,0)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
getTime
getHours/Minutes/Seconds
setHours

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'll break down the provided JSON data for you.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition represents a test case to measure the performance of getting hours, minutes, and seconds from a Date object in JavaScript. The script preparation code creates a new Date object with a specific date and time (2024-05-05). The HTML preparation code is empty, which means no additional HTML setup is required.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, three options are compared:

1. `getTime()`: Retrieves the timestamp of the Date object in milliseconds.
2. `getHours()`, `getMinutes()`, and `getSeconds()`: Accesses individual components of the Date object's time.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. `getTime()`:
	* Pros: Simple, efficient, and accurate way to get the timestamp.
	* Cons: Returns milliseconds, which might not be what you want if you need seconds or minutes. Also, it doesn't take into account timezone differences.
2. `getHours()`, `getMinutes()`, and `getSeconds()`:
	* Pros: Provides more granular access to individual time components, which can be useful in certain scenarios.
	* Cons: More complex and potentially slower due to the multiple operations.

**Library Used**

None, as this benchmark uses native JavaScript APIs (Date object).

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The `getTime()` method is an example of a built-in JavaScript function. No special features or syntax are required for this test case.

Now, let's analyze the individual test cases:

1. `getTime`:
	* This test checks if the timestamp retrieved using `getTime()` matches specific conditions (every 10 seconds, every 6 minutes, and every 36 hours). The exact logic might vary depending on the implementation.
2. `getHours/Minutes/Seconds`:
	* This test verifies that accessing individual time components returns the correct values for the specified date and time.
3. `setHours`:
	* This test checks if setting the hour, minute, second, and millisecond of the Date object to 0 results in a timestamp matching the original set timestamp.

**Other Alternatives**

To measure performance or implement similar tests, you could consider using other JavaScript APIs or libraries, such as:

1. `Intl.DateTimeFormat` for formatting dates and times.
2. `moment.js` or other date and time libraries that provide more complex features and optimizations.
3. Custom implementations using bitwise operations or other low-level techniques.

Keep in mind that the choice of library or implementation depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:129.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/129.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 129 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
getTime	23361738.0 Ops/sec
getHours/Minutes/Seconds	41322156.0 Ops/sec
setHours	9460113.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Check Date contains time (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: getTime vs getHours/Minutes/Seconds vs setHours

Created: 3 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

getTime

getHours/Minutes/Seconds

setHours

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):