Benchmark: Date constructor inputs

Tests:

Today
new Date();
Zero date
new Date(0);
Unix Timestamp
new Date(1731792019);
Datetime
new Date('2024-11-16T13:17:21.888163-08:00');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Today
Zero date
Unix Timestamp
Datetime

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 4 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

This benchmark tests various inputs to the JavaScript `Date` constructor to evaluate their performance in terms of how quickly they can create date objects. The benchmark includes four specific test cases, each representing different ways to instantiate dates.

### Test Cases Explained

1. **Today**: 
   - **Benchmark Definition**: `new Date();`
   - This test case calls the `Date` constructor without any parameters, which creates a date object representing the current date and time.
   - **Pros/Cons**:
     - **Pros**: This is the simplest and quickest way to create a date object if you need the current date and time.
     - **Cons**: It always requires the execution of the underlying system clock to obtain the current time, which can introduce variability in timing depending on system performance and state.

2. **Zero date**: 
   - **Benchmark Definition**: `new Date(0);`
   - This test case creates a date object representing the Unix epoch (January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 UTC).
   - **Pros/Cons**:
     - **Pros**: Very fast and deterministic as it doesn't rely on system time; always results in the same date object.
     - **Cons**: Limited use as it provides a fixed point in time, which might not be useful for applications requiring the current date or a specific date.

3. **Unix Timestamp**: 
   - **Benchmark Definition**: `new Date(1731792019);`
   - This test case creates a date object using a specific Unix timestamp (in milliseconds since the epoch).
   - **Pros/Cons**:
     - **Pros**: Flexible and can represent any point in time (as long as it's within the range of timestamps JavaScript can handle).
     - **Cons**: Users need to know the correct timestamp; otherwise, this can lead to errors and misinterpretations of date values.

4. **Datetime**: 
   - **Benchmark Definition**: `new Date('2024-11-16T13:17:21.888163-08:00');`
   - This test case creates a date object from an ISO 8601 formatted date string.
   - **Pros/Cons**:
     - **Pros**: Very human-readable and allows for precise date-time representations including time zones.
     - **Cons**: Parsing date strings can be slower due to the overhead of interpreting the input format. Variability in performance might occur depending on whether the JavaScript engine optimizes string parsing.

### Performance Consideration

The latest benchmark results indicate the following executions per second for each test:

- **Unix Timestamp**: 2,646,630
- **Zero date**: 2,606,811
- **Today**: 1,979,597.5
- **Datetime**: 1,129,450.5

From these results, it is clear that the least complex operations (such as constructing a date from a static value) perform better than those requiring dynamic data or parsing.

### Other Alternatives

In JavaScript, there are alternative ways to manage dates, such as:

- **Moment.js**: A popular library for parsing, validating, manipulating, and formatting dates. However, Moment.js is considered heavyweight and is not recommended for new projects due to its size and performance overhead.
  
- **date-fns**: A modern JavaScript library with a set of functions that can handle dates, providing a more lightweight alternative to Moment.js. Each function is imported individually, allowing for tree shaking to reduce bundle size.

- **Luxon**: A library created by one of the Moment.js authors. It is built on the Intl API and aims to provide a modern API that's easier to use while offering timezone support.

Regardless of the approach, it’s important to consider the trade-offs between simplicity, performance, and readability when choosing how to handle dates in JavaScript.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/130.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Today	1979597.5 Ops/sec
Zero date	2606811.0 Ops/sec
Unix Timestamp	2646630.0 Ops/sec
Datetime	1129450.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Date constructor inputs (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Today vs Zero date vs Unix Timestamp vs Datetime

Created: 4 days ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Today

Zero date

Unix Timestamp

Datetime

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated 4 days ago):