Benchmark: toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() asd

Script Preparation code:

var someFloat = 0.123456789;

Tests:

toFixed(4)
someFloat.toFixed(0);
(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()
Math.round(someFloat);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
toFixed(4)
(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, along with the pros and cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different methods for rounding numbers:

1. `toFixed(4)`
2. `(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()`
3. `Math.round(someFloat)`

These methods are compared to determine which one is the fastest on a given machine running Firefox 89.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

A) `toFixed(4)` - This method uses the built-in `toFixed` function to round the number to the specified precision (in this case, 4 decimal places).

B) `(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()` - This method uses a mathematical trick to first scale up the number by multiplying it by 10,000, then rounding it using `Math.round`, and finally scaling it back down by dividing by 10,000. The result is converted to a string using `toString()`.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

A) `toFixed(4)`:

Pros:

* Simple and intuitive
* Built-in function in JavaScript
* Easy to read and maintain

Cons:

* May introduce rounding errors due to the underlying algorithm used by `toFixed`
* Can be slower than other methods for very large numbers

B) `(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()`:

Pros:

* Avoids potential rounding errors of `toFixed` (though this method still has its own quirks)
* Can be faster for very large numbers due to avoiding intermediate calculations
* Portable across different JavaScript engines and platforms

Cons:

* Less intuitive and more complex than `toFixed`
* Requires additional mathematical operations, which can be slower for smaller numbers

**Library and Purpose**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that the use of `Math.round` and `toString()` suggests that the benchmark is using a subset of the JavaScript Math API.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None are explicitly used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

Other methods for rounding numbers include:

* Using `Number.EPSILON` to estimate the smallest possible difference between two numbers
* Implementing a custom rounding algorithm using bit manipulation (e.g., using `Integer.bitwiseAND` and `Integer.bitwiseOR`)

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as widely supported or optimized as the methods used in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The preparation code provided creates a variable `someFloat` with a value of 0.123456789, which is then used as input for the rounding functions being tested.

Overall, this benchmark provides a good example of how to compare different methods for rounding numbers and highlights the importance of considering performance, precision, and portability when choosing a method.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:89.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/89.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 89 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
toFixed(4)	33261902.0 Ops/sec
(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()	1800254720.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

toFixed vs toPrecision vs Math.round() asd (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: toFixed(4) vs (Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

toFixed(4)

(Math.round(*10000)/10000).toString()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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