Benchmark: String concat – `` vs concat

Tests:

``
let str = ''; str = `${str}str`;
concat
let str = ''; str = str.concat("str");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
``
concat

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two individual test cases: ```` (template literals) and `concat`. The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches for concatenating strings.

**Options compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Template literals (`"````)**: This approach uses template literals to concatenate strings. Template literals were introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).
2. **`concat()` method**: This is a built-in JavaScript method that concatenates two or more strings.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Template literals (`"````)**:
	* Pros:
		+ More readable and expressive, as it allows you to embed expressions inside string literals.
		+ Less prone to errors, as the syntax is stricter than `concat()`.
	* Cons:
		+ May incur a performance overhead due to the additional parsing steps required for template literals.
2. **`concat()` method**:
	+ Pros:
		+ Generally faster and more efficient, as it is implemented in native code and optimized for performance.
	* Cons:
		+ Less readable and less expressive than template literals.

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the provided benchmark definition or test cases. However, some JavaScript engines (like V8) use internal libraries to implement features like template literals.

**Special JS feature**

Template literals are a special feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). They provide a more expressive and readable way to concatenate strings with embedded expressions.

**Other alternatives**

If you want to test alternative approaches, you could consider:

1. **String interpolation**: Some JavaScript engines support string interpolation using `str + str` or similar syntax.
2. **String concatenation using arrays**: You can also concatenate strings by creating an array of strings and joining them together using the `join()` method: `[str, 'str'].join('')`.
3. **Other string concatenation methods**: There are other ways to concatenate strings in JavaScript, such as using `+` operator or other libraries like Lodash.

For a more comprehensive benchmark, you would need to include these alternatives and repeat the testing process for each approach.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 11_2_1) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.192 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Mac OS X 11.2.1

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
``	853484928.0 Ops/sec
concat	834671232.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

String concat – `` vs concat (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `` vs concat

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

``

concat

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):