Benchmark: JSON stringify long array with ids

Script Preparation code:

var longArray = [...Array(1000).fill('123123123')];

Tests:

JSON Stringify 1
JSON.stringify(longArray)
JSON Stringify 2
JSON.stringify(longArray);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
JSON Stringify 1
JSON Stringify 2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one month ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:132.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/132.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 132 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
JSON Stringify 1	36598.8 Ops/sec
JSON Stringify 2	37726.8 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 provided benchmark and its test cases to understand what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided JSON defines a benchmark called `MeasureThat.net` where users can create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark has three main components:

*   **Script Preparation Code**: This section provides a script that is executed before the actual benchmarking begins. In this case, it initializes an array `longArray` with 1000 elements, each containing the string '123123123'.
*   **Html Preparation Code**: This section is empty in the provided example, but it might be used to prepare any necessary HTML elements or settings for the test.
*   **Benchmark Definition**: This specifies the actual benchmarking function that will be executed. In this case, there are two different definitions:
    *   `JSON.stringify(longArray)` - This uses the built-in JavaScript method `Stringify()` on the array.
    *   `JSON.stringify(longArray);` - This is a semicolon-separated version of the previous test case.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

*   **Test Case 1:** `JSON Stringify 1`
    *   The benchmarking function used is `JSON.stringify(longArray)`.
    *   This method creates a new string that represents the array in a format called JSON (JavaScript Object Notation).
*   **Test Case 2:** `JSON Stringify 2`
    *   The benchmarking function used is `JSON.stringify(longArray);`.
    *   Although this method seems similar to the previous one, there's an added semicolon at the end of the function call.

**What options are being compared?**

The main comparison in these test cases is between using a semicolon after `JSON.stringify()` and not using one. The presence of a semicolon affects how JavaScript handles the resulting string:

*   Without a semicolon (`JSON.stringify(longArray)`), the method call is treated as part of an expression, not as a statement.
*   With a semicolon (`JSON.stringify(longArray);`), the method call is treated as a separate statement.

**Pros and Cons**

The choice between using or omitting a semicolon in this context depends on your personal coding style preferences and how you structure your code. However, here are some general considerations:

*   **Without a semicolon:**
    *   It's more common to use without a semicolon, especially when working with JavaScript frameworks.
    *   If used correctly, it can improve readability by explicitly separating method calls from the rest of the code.
*   **With a semicolon:**
    *   Using a semicolon might be considered more conventional in certain contexts, such as following specific coding guidelines or for older browsers that support it differently.

**Special Considerations**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these test cases beyond basic method calls and array initialization. However, the behavior of `JSON.stringify()` can vary depending on how it's called (i.e., with or without a semicolon), so this aspect should be taken into account when interpreting results.

**Other Alternatives**

The alternatives for this benchmark include other methods to measure string formatting performance in JavaScript, such as:

*   **Using different string formatting libraries**, like Moment.js for date formatting.
*   **Employing polyfills or fallbacks** for older browsers that don't support modern features.
*   **Optimizing code through techniques like caching or memoization**, depending on the specifics of your use case.

In summary, this benchmark tests how JavaScript handles `JSON.stringify()` with and without a semicolon at the end. The choice between these approaches depends on coding style preferences and specific requirements for string formatting performance in different contexts.

Related benchmarks:

JSON stringify long array with ids (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: JSON Stringify 1 vs JSON Stringify 2

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

JSON Stringify 1

JSON Stringify 2

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):