Benchmark: date formatter libraries 2021-01-31

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/moment.js/2.29.1/moment.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/luxon@1.25.0/build/global/luxon.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/fecha/2.3.3/fecha.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/date-fns/1.29.0/date_fns.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/dayjs/1.10.4/dayjs.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://wzrd.in/standalone/dateformat@latest"></script>
<script src="https://wzrd.in/standalone/time-stamp@latest"></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/fdate"></script>

Script Preparation code:

window.__date__ = new Date();
window.__expected__ = '2000/01/06';

Tests:

3846masa/fdate
var actual = fdate`${'YYYY'}/${'MM'}/${'DD'}`(__date__); console.assert(actual === __expected__);
moment/moment
var actual = moment(__date__).format('YYYY/MM/DD'); console.assert(actual === __expected__);
moment/luxon
var actual = luxon.DateTime.fromJSDate(__date__).toFormat('yyyy/MM/dd'); console.assert(actual === __expected__);
taylorhakes/fecha
var actual = fecha.format(__date__, 'YYYY/MM/DD'); console.assert(actual === __expected__);
date-fns/date-fns
var actual = dateFns.format(__date__, 'YYYY/MM/DD'); console.assert(actual === __expected__);
xx45/dayjs
var actual = dayjs(__date__).format('YYYY/MM/DD'); console.assert(actual === __expected__);
felixge/node-dateformat
var actual = dateformat(__date__, 'yyyy/mm/dd'); console.assert(actual === __expected__);
jonschlinkert/time-stamp
var actual = timeStamp('YYYY/MM/DD', __date__); console.assert(actual === __expected__);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
3846masa/fdate
moment/moment
moment/luxon
taylorhakes/fecha
date-fns/date-fns
xx45/dayjs
felixge/node-dateformat
jonschlinkert/time-stamp

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/87.0.4280.142 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 87 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
3846masa/fdate	6531.0 Ops/sec
moment/moment	8279.2 Ops/sec
moment/luxon	8145.4 Ops/sec
taylorhakes/fecha	8592.5 Ops/sec
date-fns/date-fns	7581.7 Ops/sec
xx45/dayjs	7104.1 Ops/sec
felixge/node-dateformat	6170.5 Ops/sec
jonschlinkert/time-stamp	7755.1 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what is being tested in the provided JSON benchmark definition and individual test cases.

**Tested Libraries:**

The benchmark tests six different date formatting libraries:

1. **Moment.js**: A popular JavaScript library for working with dates.
2. **Luxon**: A modern, open-source alternative to Moment.js, providing more features and better performance.
3. **Fecha**: A lightweight, simple library for working with dates in the browser.
4. **Date-fns**: A fast and expressive library for working with dates and times in JavaScript.
5. **Day.js**: A modern alternative to Moment.js, designed for simplicity and ease of use.
6. **Dateformat** (also known as Node-Dateformat) and **TimeStamp** are not libraries that format dates but rather standalone functions for formatting dates.

**Comparison Options:**

The benchmark compares the performance of each library in formatting a specific date string:

`YYYY/MM/DD`

Here's a brief overview of each library's approach and pros/cons:

* **Moment.js**: Uses its own parser to parse the input date string into a Moment object, which is then formatted using its `format()` method. Pros: mature ecosystem, extensive documentation; Cons: can be slow for simple formatting tasks.
* **Luxon**: Parses the input date string directly into a Luxon DateTime object, which is then formatted using its `toFormat()` method. Pros: fast and lightweight, provides more features than Moment.js; Cons: can be overwhelming for beginners due to extensive options.
* **Fecha**: Uses a simple and straightforward parsing approach, where it extracts the year, month, and day from the input string and formats them accordingly. Pros: lightweight and easy to use; Cons: may not handle edge cases well.
* **Date-fns**: Utilizes a functional programming style to parse the input date string into an ISO 8601 object, which is then formatted using its various formatting functions (e.g., `format()`). Pros: fast, expressive, and easy to use; Cons: can be challenging for beginners without prior experience with functional programming.
* **Day.js**: Similar to Date-fns, it parses the input date string into an ISO 8601 object and then formats it using its `format()` method. Pros: fast, modern, and easy to use; Cons: may not support all features of Moment.js.
* **Dateformat** (Node-Dateformat) and **TimeStamp**: These are standalone functions for formatting dates, so they don't require parsing input strings in the same way as the other libraries. They simply format the provided date object or primitive value accordingly.

**Performance Results:**

The benchmark results show that each library performs differently depending on the specific use case:

* **Date-fns** and **Day.js** appear to be the fastest, likely due to their functional programming style and optimized implementations.
* **Luxon** is also relatively fast, thanks to its modern design and efficient parsing approach.
* **Moment.js**, while mature and feature-rich, can be slower than some of the newer alternatives.
* **Fecha** is lightweight but may not handle edge cases well, resulting in slightly slower performance.
* **Dateformat** (Node-Dateformat) and **TimeStamp** are relatively slow due to their standalone nature and lack of optimization.

Keep in mind that these results are specific to this particular benchmark and may vary depending on other factors, such as input data distribution or system resources.

Related benchmarks:

date formatter libraries 2021-01-31 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 3846masa/fdate vs moment/moment vs moment/luxon vs taylorhakes/fecha vs date-fns/date-fns vs xx45/dayjs vs felixge/node-dateformat vs jonschlinkert/time-stamp

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

3846masa/fdate

moment/moment

moment/luxon

taylorhakes/fecha

date-fns/date-fns

xx45/dayjs

felixge/node-dateformat

jonschlinkert/time-stamp

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):