Benchmark: mustache@4.2.0 vs handlebars@4.7.8

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://s3.amazonaws.com/builds.handlebarsjs.com/handlebars.min-v4.7.8.js"></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/mustache@4.2.0/mustache.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var template = "<strong>This is a slightly more complicated {{thing}}.</strong>.\n{{! Just ignore this business. }}\nCheck this out:\n{{#hasThings}}\n<ul>\n{{#things}}\n<li class={{className}}>{{word}}</li>\n{{/things}}</ul>.\n{{/hasThings}}\n{{^hasThings}}\n\n<small>Nothing to check out...</small>\n{{/hasThings}}";

var context = {
  thing: function() {
    return "blah";
  },
  things: [
    {"className": "one", word: "@fat"},
    {"className": "two", word: "@dhg"},
    {"className": "three", word:"@sayrer"}
  ],
  hasThings: true
};

var handlebarsRenderer = Handlebars.compile(template);
Mustache.parse(template);

Tests:

Handlebars
handlebarsRenderer(context);
Mustache
Mustache.render(template, context);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Handlebars
Mustache

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 22 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Context**

The test compares the performance of two templating libraries: Handlebars and Mustache. Both libraries are used to render dynamic HTML templates with data.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Handlebars**: A popular JavaScript templating engine that allows you to define templates using a syntax similar to HTML, but with additional features like conditionals, loops, and helpers.
2. **Mustache**: Another widely-used JavaScript templating engine that provides a simple and flexible way to render dynamic HTML templates.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Handlebars**:
	+ Pros: More feature-rich than Mustache, with support for conditionals, loops, and helpers. Has a more extensive community and ecosystem.
	+ Cons: Can be more complex to learn and use, especially for beginners.
* **Mustache**:
	+ Pros: Simpler and more lightweight than Handlebars, making it easier to learn and use. Has a smaller but still active community.
	+ Cons: Less feature-rich than Handlebars, which might limit its flexibility in certain use cases.

**Libraries Used**

In the benchmark code, both libraries are used to render the same template:

* **Handlebars**: The `handlebarsRenderer` function is created using the `Handlebars.compile()` method, and then the rendered HTML is generated by calling this function with the `context` object.
* **Mustache**: The `parse()` method of Mustache is used to parse the template string, and then the rendered HTML is generated by calling the `render()` method with the `template` string and the `context` object.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax**

Neither library uses any special JavaScript features or syntax that's not widely available. However, both libraries use a templating syntax that's similar to HTML, which can make it easier to read and write templates.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative templating libraries, some popular options include:

* **Pug**: A templating engine inspired by EJS (Embedded JavaScript) that provides a simple and lightweight way to render dynamic HTML templates.
* **Ejs**: A templating engine that allows you to define templates using a syntax similar to HTML, with additional features like conditionals and helpers.
* **Dust.js**: A fast and flexible templating engine that provides a simple way to render dynamic HTML templates.

Keep in mind that each library has its own strengths and weaknesses, so it's worth exploring each option to determine which one best fits your needs.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/128.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 128 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Handlebars	200307.1 Ops/sec
Mustache	338529.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

[email protected] vs [email protected] (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Handlebars vs Mustache

Created: 2 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Handlebars

Mustache

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 22 days ago):