Benchmark: join vs tostring+replace

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {b:1,c:2,g:3,m:4,r:5,u:6,w:7,y:8};

Tests:

join
Object.keys(obj).join("")
tostring+replace
Object.keys(obj).toString().replace(',','')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
join
tostring+replace

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/83.0.4103.116 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 83 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
join	2080586.8 Ops/sec
tostring+replace	1349254.9 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches to concatenate strings in JavaScript:

1. `Object.keys(obj).join("")`: This approach uses the `join()` method on an array of keys from the `obj` object. The empty string (`""`) is used as the separator.
2. `Object.keys(obj).toString().replace(',', '')`: This approach first converts the array of keys to a string using `toString()`, and then replaces all commas (`','`) with nothing, effectively removing them.

**Options Compared:**

The two options being compared are:

* Using `join()` method on an array
* Concatenating strings manually using `+`

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **Using `join()` method on an array:**
	* Pros:
		+ Concise and readable code.
		+ Less error-prone than concatenating strings manually.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be as efficient as a native string operation, especially for large arrays.
2. **Concatenating strings manually using `+`:**
	* Pros:
		+ Can be more efficient than `join()` method for very large arrays.
	* Cons:
		+ Less readable and error-prone code.

**Library and Special JS Feature:**

There are no libraries or special JavaScript features used in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two basic string concatenation approaches.

**Other Considerations:**

When working with strings in JavaScript, it's essential to consider the following:

* Unicode support: If you need to work with non-ASCII characters, ensure that your approach can handle them correctly.
* Buffering and caching: If you're working with large strings or arrays, consider using buffering techniques to improve performance.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives for string concatenation in JavaScript include:

* Using `+` operator between strings (although this method is generally discouraged due to its potential for errors).
* Using a template literal (introduced in ECMAScript 2015) with interpolation.
* Using a library like Lodash or Underscore.js, which provide various utility functions, including string concatenation methods.

Keep in mind that the best approach depends on the specific use case and requirements. The `join()` method is often a good choice for joining arrays of strings, while concatenating strings manually may be more suitable for very large datasets or performance-critical code.

Related benchmarks:

join vs tostring+replace (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: join vs tostring+replace

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

join

tostring+replace

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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