Benchmark: DateTime vs Date

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/moment.js/2.22.1/moment.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/luxon@1.2.0/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://unpkg.com/dayjs"></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>

Tests:

Luxon DateTime
luxon.DateTime('2021-11-11T01:00:00.000+01:00')
Native Date
new Date('2021-11-11T01:00:00.000+01:00')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Luxon DateTime
Native Date

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help you understand the JavaScript benchmarking tests provided on MeasureThat.net.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two ways to work with dates in JavaScript: using native JavaScript's `Date` object and using the Luxon library, which is a popular date and time library for JavaScript.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition includes four parts:

1. **Script Preparation Code**: This code is executed before running each test case. It loads several date and time libraries, including:
	* moment.js
	* luxon
	* fecha
	* date-fns
	* dayjs
	* dateFormat (and time-stamp from wzrd.in)
	* fdate

These libraries are likely used to set up the testing environment.

2. **Html Preparation Code**: This is an empty string, indicating that no HTML-specific code is needed for this benchmark.

3. **Script Preparation Code**: The above script preparation code, which loads the date and time libraries.

4. **Benchmark Definition**: The actual benchmark definition includes two test cases:
	* Luxon DateTime: `luxon.DateTime('2021-11-11T01:00:00.000+01:00')`
	* Native Date: `new Date('2021-11-11T01:00:00.000+01:00')`

**Options Compared**

The two options compared are:

1. **Luxon DateTime**: uses the Luxon library to create a date-time object.
2. **Native Date**: uses native JavaScript's `Date` object to create a date-time object.

**Pros and Cons**

**Luxon DateTime**:

Pros:

* Potentially more efficient, as it is implemented in C++ and compiled to JavaScript (via WebAssembly)
* Provides additional features, such as support for time zones and parsing of various date formats

Cons:

* Requires an extra library to be loaded
* May have a steeper learning curve due to its unique API

**Native Date**:

Pros:

* Familiar API for many developers
* No extra libraries need to be loaded

Cons:

* Potentially slower, as it is interpreted JavaScript code
* Limited features compared to Luxon DateTime

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses a fixed date-time value (`2021-11-11T01:00:00.000+01:00`) for both test cases. This may not be representative of all use cases, but it allows the benchmark to focus on the performance differences between the two approaches.
* The benchmark does not account for any potential side effects of using `Date` objects, such as affecting system clock settings or causing synchronization issues in concurrent code.

**Alternatives**

Other libraries and approaches that could be used instead of Luxon DateTime include:

* fecha: a lightweight JavaScript library for working with dates
* moment.js: a popular JavaScript library for working with dates and times (although it may not be the fastest option)
* date-fns: a small, feature-rich library for working with dates in JavaScript

Keep in mind that this is just a brief overview of the benchmark, and there are many other factors to consider when evaluating the performance of different date-time libraries and approaches.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:92.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/92.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 92 on Mac OS X 10.14

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Luxon DateTime	0.0 Ops/sec
Native Date	6119524.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

DateTime vs Date (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Luxon DateTime vs Native Date

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Luxon DateTime

Native Date

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):