Benchmark: split vs for loop 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script>

var s="Since all three methods have roughly equivalent performance, my preference is to use slice. It supports extracting from the end of the string and I feel that returning an empty string when start index > stop follows the principle of least surprise better than substring's swapping of parameters. I avoid substr because of the browser inconsistency.";
var d=" ";
  

</script>

Tests:

split
var a=s.split(d); var i,l=a.length,w; for(i=0;i<l;i++){ w=a[i]; };
for loop
var i,l=s.length,w,lsp=-1; for(i=0;i<l;i++){ if(s.charAt(i) == d){ w=s.slice(lsp+1,i); lsp=i } };

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
split
for loop

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the details of this benchmark.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two different approaches for splitting a string into individual substrings: using the `split()` method and a traditional `for` loop with conditional statements.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases in this benchmark:

1. **split**: This test case uses the `split()` method to split a string into individual substrings based on a given delimiter.
2. **for loop**: This test case uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the characters of a string and create individual substrings when a certain condition is met (i.e., when the character matches the delimiter).

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, there are no external libraries used other than built-in JavaScript methods.

**JavaScript Features/Syntax**

There are a few notable JavaScript features/syntax used in these test cases:

* `split()`: This method splits a string into individual substrings based on a given delimiter. In the **split** test case, it's used to split the input string `s` into substrings using the delimiter `d`.
* `slice()` and `charAt()` methods: These built-in JavaScript methods are used in the **for loop** test case to extract individual characters from the string.
* Conditional statements (`if` statement): This is used in the **for loop** test case to determine when to create a new substring.

**Pros/Cons of Different Approaches**

Based on the benchmark results, here's a summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

* **split() method**: Pros:
	+ More concise and readable code
	+ Easier to maintain and modify
	+ Supports extracting from the end of the string (as mentioned in the script preparation code)
* Cons: None significant in this benchmark
* **for loop with conditional statements**: Pros:
	+ Can be used when a specific condition needs to be met before creating a new substring
	+ Can be more efficient in certain scenarios (although not in this benchmark)
* Cons:
	+ Less concise and readable code compared to the `split()` method
	+ More prone to errors if not implemented correctly

**Other Considerations**

When deciding which approach to use, consider the following factors:

* Code readability and maintainability: If you prioritize clear and concise code, using the `split()` method is a good choice.
* Performance requirements: If performance is critical, use benchmarking tools like MeasureThat.net to compare the execution speeds of both approaches on different browsers/platforms.
* Specific business logic requirements: If your use case requires conditional statements or specific processing before creating substrings, the **for loop** approach might be more suitable.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for splitting strings in JavaScript include:

* Using a regular expression (`split()` method with regex)
* Implementing a custom loop-based solution (although this is less efficient and harder to maintain)
* Utilizing third-party libraries or frameworks that provide string manipulation features (although not applicable in this specific benchmark)

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/101.0.4951.67 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 101 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
split	1835794.0 Ops/sec
for loop	7551.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

split vs for loop 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: split vs for loop

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

split

for loop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one month ago):