Benchmark: Date.parse vs custom

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var dateString = '2000-01-25';

function parseDate(str) {
  const dateValues = str.split('-').map(_.parseInt);

  return new Date(dateValues[0], dateValues[1] - 1, dateValues[2]);
}

Tests:

Date.parse
var parsedDate = Date.parse(dateString);
custom
var parsedDate = parseDate(dateString);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Date.parse
custom

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_12_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/60.0.3112.78 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 60 on Mac OS X 10.12.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Date.parse	1951572.0 Ops/sec
custom	731608.2 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches for parsing dates: using the `Date.parse()` method provided by JavaScript's built-in `Date` object, and implementing a custom parser using a library (Lodash).

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Date.parse()**: This is the built-in method in JavaScript that attempts to parse a string into a Date object.
2. **Custom Parser**: This approach uses a custom function (`parseDate`) implemented using Lodash's `map` and `parseInt` functions.

**Pros and Cons**

**Date.parse():**

Pros:

* Easy to use and implement
* Built-in method, so no additional libraries are required

Cons:

* May not handle all date formats correctly (e.g., ambiguous dates)
* Can be slower than a custom parser in some cases

**Custom Parser:**

Pros:

* More flexible and customizable for specific date formats
* Can be faster than `Date.parse()` for certain inputs

Cons:

* Requires an additional library (Lodash) to be included
* More complex implementation compared to `Date.parse()`

**Lodash Library**

The custom parser uses Lodash's `map` function to split the date string into its components, and then applies `parseInt` to each component. The resulting values are then used to create a new Date object.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanation.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to implement a custom parser similar to the one in this benchmark, you could consider using other libraries like:

* Moment.js: A popular date and time library that provides more advanced features than Lodash's `parseDate` function.
* Date-fns: A lightweight library for working with dates in JavaScript.

However, it's worth noting that implementing a custom parser can be complex and may not always outperform the built-in `Date.parse()` method.

Related benchmarks:

Date.parse vs custom (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Date.parse vs custom

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Date.parse

custom

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):