Benchmark: TestJSONParse - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

const obj = {
    "TEST": 1
}
var str = JSON.stringify(obj)

Tests:

testbech1
const a = JSON.parse(str) if(a.TEST == 2){ }else if(a.TEST == 1){ }
testbech2
if(JSON.parse(str).TEST == 2){ }else if(JSON.parse(str).TEST == 1){ }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
testbech1
testbech2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that provides details about the test case. Here's a breakdown:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark.
* `Description`: An optional description of the benchmark.
* `Script Preparation Code`: A JavaScript code snippet used to prepare the input data for the benchmark. In this case, it creates a JSON string from an object containing a single property `"TEST"` with value 1.
* `Html Preparation Code`: An optional code snippet used to generate HTML content. In this case, it's empty.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **testbech1**
	* `Benchmark Definition`: A JavaScript code snippet that parses the JSON string and checks if the resulting object has a property with value 2.
	* This test is checking the performance of parsing a JSON string and accessing its properties.
2. **testbech2**
	* `Benchmark Definition`: Similar to testbech1, but uses the dot notation (e.g., `JSON.parse(str).TEST`) instead of bracket notation (e.g., `a.TEST`).
	* This test is checking the performance of using dot notation to access JSON object properties.

**Library Used**

There is no explicitly mentioned library used in these benchmark definitions. However, it's likely that the `JSON` object and its methods (like `parse`) are being tested, as they are built-in JavaScript functions.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

Both test cases use a special syntax:

* Bracket notation (`a.TEST`) vs dot notation (`JSON.parse(str).TEST`)
* The use of `if-else` statements with conditional checks

These features are not specific to any particular library or framework, but rather part of the JavaScript language itself.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief overview of each approach:

1. **Bracket notation**: Advantages:
	* Widespread adoption and familiarity among developers.
	* Compact syntax.
	* Easy to read and write.
	* Disadvantages:
		+ Can be error-prone if not used correctly (e.g., typos).
		+ Might lead to over-reliance on bracket notation, making code harder to read in certain contexts.
2. **Dot notation**: Advantages:
	* More explicit and readable, especially for those familiar with object-oriented programming concepts.
	* Reduces the risk of errors caused by typos in bracket notation (e.g., `a TesT` instead of `a.TEST`).
	* Disadvantages:
		+ Less compact syntax than bracket notation.
		+ Might lead to over-reliance on dot notation, making code harder to read in certain contexts.

**Other Alternatives**

If the goal is to test parsing JSON strings and accessing their properties, alternative benchmarking approaches could include:

1. Using different data formats (e.g., XML, CSV) instead of JSON.
2. Incorporating additional logic or computations within the benchmarked code.
3. Examining the performance of using specific libraries or frameworks for JSON processing (e.g., `Jackson`, `JSON.NET`).
4. Evaluating the impact of browser-specific features or settings on JSON parsing and access.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require modifications to the benchmark definitions and test cases, which might affect the comparability of results.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/107.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 107 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
testbech1	2307533.0 Ops/sec
testbech2	1170294.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

TestJSONParse (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: testbech1 vs testbech2

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

testbech1

testbech2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):