Benchmark: parseInt vs Math.trunc 2

Script Preparation code:

var num = Math.random() * 100;

Tests:

Trunc
Math.round(num);
parseInt
parseInt(num);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Trunc
parseInt

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/99.0.4844.51 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 99 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Trunc	9509227.0 Ops/sec
parseInt	9384841.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of measuring JavaScript performance!

The provided JSON represents two benchmark tests: `parseInt vs Math.trunc` and two individual test cases: `Trunc` (using `Math.round`) and `parseInt`.

**Benchmark Definition**

The first part of the JSON is a description of the overall benchmark. In this case, it's testing the performance difference between using `parseInt` and `Math.trunc` on an integer value generated by `Math.random() * 100`.

Here's what's being compared:

* `parseInt(num)`: This function attempts to convert the given string to an integer. If the conversion is not possible (e.g., if the input string contains non-numeric characters), it returns NaN (Not a Number). In this benchmark, we're assuming the generated random value will always be a valid integer.
* `Math.trunc(num)`: This function returns the largest possible integer less than or equal to the given number. It's similar to `Math.floor()` but doesn't round towards zero.

**Pros and Cons**

**parseInt**:

Pros:

* Widely supported in most browsers
* Can handle a wide range of input formats (e.g., strings with leading zeros, negative numbers)

Cons:

* May return NaN for non-numeric inputs, which can lead to unexpected behavior
* Can be slower than `Math.trunc` due to the string conversion step

**Math.trunc**:

Pros:

* Faster and more lightweight than `parseInt`
* Returns a single integer value without any intermediate conversions

Cons:

* Only works with numeric input values (no support for strings or non-numeric formats)
* May not be suitable for all use cases where string parsing is necessary

**Other Considerations**

In addition to the performance difference, it's essential to consider other factors when choosing between `parseInt` and `Math.trunc`, such as:

* Robustness: If you need to handle invalid input or unexpected behavior, `parseInt` might be a better choice.
* Code readability: Using `Math.trunc` can make your code more concise and easier to read, but it may require additional error handling if not used carefully.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, it's worth noting that both functions (`parseInt` and `Math.trunc`) are built-in JavaScript methods, so they don't rely on external libraries for their implementation.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. The tests only involve basic arithmetic operations using the provided numbers.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to `parseInt` and `Math.trunc`, consider the following options:

* `Number()` function: This can be used to convert a string to a number, but it's less efficient than `parseInt`.
* `parseFloat()` function: Similar to `Number()`, but returns a floating-point value instead of an integer.
* Third-party libraries like `lodash` or `mathjs`: These libraries offer more advanced mathematical functions and might provide better performance for specific use cases.

Keep in mind that the choice of implementation ultimately depends on your project's requirements, performance constraints, and personal coding preferences.

Related benchmarks:

parseInt vs Math.trunc 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Trunc vs parseInt

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Trunc

parseInt

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):