Benchmark: JSON.parse() vs. js-yaml

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/js-yaml/3.12.0/js-yaml.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var jsonString = '{"key1": "val1", "key2": 7}';
var yamlString = 'key1: val1\nkey2: 7';

Tests:

JSON.parse()
var dummy = JSON.parse(jsonString);
js-yaml
var dummy = jsyaml.safeLoad(yamlString);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON.parse()
js-yaml

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JSON.parse()	10756361.0 Ops/sec
js-yaml	1200987.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON benchmark definition and test cases to understand what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Script Preparation Code` section defines two JavaScript variables:

* `jsonString`: a JSON string containing an object with two key-value pairs: `"key1": "val1"` and `"key2": 7`.
* `yamlString`: a YAML string containing the same data as `jsonString`, but in YAML format.

The `Html Preparation Code` section includes a script tag that loads the `js-yaml` library, which is used to parse the `yamlString`.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **JSON.parse()**: This method parses a JSON string into a JavaScript object.
2. **js-yaml.safeLoad()**: This method parses a YAML string into a JavaScript object using the `js-yaml` library.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **JSON.parse()**:
	+ Pros: widely supported, efficient, and relatively simple to implement.
	+ Cons: can be slower for large JSON strings due to its simplicity, and may not handle all edge cases (e.g., nested objects with circular references).
* **js-yaml.safeLoad()**:
	+ Pros: handles more complex YAML data structures, including arrays and hashes, and provides better error handling than `JSON.parse()`.
	+ Cons: requires the `js-yaml` library to be loaded, which may add overhead, and its performance may be slower due to the additional complexity.

**Library: js-yaml**

The `js-yaml` library is a JavaScript implementation of the YAML data serialization format. It provides methods for parsing and generating YAML data, including `safeLoad()` (used in this benchmark) and other functions like `dump()` and `schema()`.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that are specific to a particular browser or version of JavaScript.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to compare the performance of different JSON parsing libraries, you could also consider adding benchmarks for:

* **fast-json-parser**: A high-performance JSON parser library.
* **json-stringify-safe**: A lightweight JSON stringifier library that can be used for both parsing and generating JSON data.
* **xml2js** (for YAML-like data): If you want to compare the performance of different libraries for parsing YAML-like data, you could consider adding a benchmark for `xml2js`, which is a popular JavaScript library for parsing XML and YAML data.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own pros and cons, and the choice of library ultimately depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

JSON.parse() vs. js-yaml (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JSON.parse() vs js-yaml

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JSON.parse()

js-yaml

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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