new Intl.NumberFormat('en-US', {
style: 'decimal',
minimumFractionDigits: 0,
maximumFractionDigits: 3,
}).format('100000.234')
const value = '100000.234';
// fix for rounding issues, see Mozilla docs on method toFixed()
const normalizedValue = value * 10 ** 3;
const formattedValue = normalizedValue.toFixed(0);
return +formattedValue / 10 ** 3;
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
Intl | |
String |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
Intl | 20268.1 Ops/sec |
String | 2543998.5 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.
Benchmark Overview
The provided benchmark compares two approaches to format a decimal number:
Intl.NumberFormat
API to format a decimal number with specific settings (style, minimum fraction digits, maximum fraction digits).Options Compared
The benchmark is testing two options:
Intl.NumberFormat
API to perform the formatting.Pros and Cons of Each Approach
Intl:
Pros:
Cons:
String:
Pros:
Cons:
Library Used
In the provided benchmark, the Intl
option uses the Intl.NumberFormat
library. This library is part of the ECMAScript Internationalization API, which provides a standardized way to format numbers according to locale and culture.
Special JS Feature or Syntax
There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. Both approaches use standard JavaScript features (string manipulation, loops, conditionals).
Other Alternatives
If you want to explore alternative approaches, consider:
toString()
and +
operators: Another approach to manually format numbers using string concatenation and arithmetic operations.Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics, pros, and cons compared to the Intl API or manual string manipulation.