Benchmark: array join vs string concate again

Tests:

join
let year = '2019'; let month = '12'; let day = '20'; let str = [year, month, day].join('-');
concate
let year = '2019'; let month = '12'; let day = '20'; let str = year+'-'+month+'-'+day;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
join
concate

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the explanation into sections to make it easier to understand.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case, where two different approaches are compared: using `String.join()` and concatenating strings manually (`+` operator). The test case is designed to measure the performance difference between these two methods when joining three string values into one.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Using `String.join()`**: This method joins multiple strings together by inserting a specified separator (in this case, a hyphen `-`) between each string.
2. **Manual concatenation using the `+` operator**: This approach involves concatenating three strings together manually using the `+` operator.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Using `String.join()`**:
	* Pros: More concise and readable code, reduces chance of human error.
	* Cons: May not be suitable for older browsers or environments that don't support `join()`, as it's a modern method.
2. **Manual concatenation using the `+` operator**:
	* Pros: Widely supported by older browsers and environments, easier to understand for developers familiar with this syntax.
	* Cons: More verbose code, increases chance of human error.

**Library Used**

In this test case, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, it's worth noting that `String.join()` is a built-in method in JavaScript, so no library is required to use it.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these test cases. They only involve basic string concatenation and the `join()` method.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to measure the performance of other string concatenation methods, you could consider using:

1. **Template literals**: Introduced in ECMAScript 2015, template literals provide a more concise way to concatenate strings.
2. **Regular expressions**: Some developers might use regular expressions for string manipulation, although this approach is generally less efficient than simple concatenation or `join()`.

Keep in mind that these alternatives are not as straightforward as using `+` or `join()`, and their performance may vary depending on the specific use case and browser/environment.

I hope this explanation helps!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/76.0.3809.100 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 76 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
join	1526144.0 Ops/sec
concate	403851264.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

array join vs string concate again (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: join vs concate

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

join

concate

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):