Benchmark: Intl.Collator.compare() vs localeCompare() with Map

Script Preparation code:

var map = new Map([...Array(1000).keys()].map(a => ([a.toString(), 5])))

var options = {
  sensitivity: 'base'
};

var collator = new Intl.Collator(undefined, options);

Tests:

localeCompare()
[...map.entries()].sort((a, b) => a[0].localeCompare(b[0], undefined, options))
Intl.Collator.compare()
[...map.keys()].sort(collator.compare).map(k => ([k, map.get(k)]))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
localeCompare()
Intl.Collator.compare()

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.

The benchmark compares two JavaScript methods: `Intl.Collator.compare()` and `localeCompare()`, both used for comparing strings based on locale-specific rules. The test is designed to measure the performance difference between these two approaches.

**Options compared**

In the provided benchmark, only one option is being compared:

1. **sensitivity**: This option controls how sensitive the comparison is. The values can be:
	* `base` (default): Uses the base locale for comparison.
	* `variant`: Uses a variant of the locale that's more strict.

**Pros and Cons**

Using `Intl.Collator.compare()`:

Pros:

* More accurate results, as it takes into account locale-specific rules.
* Can handle complex comparisons involving multiple factors.

Cons:

* May be slower due to its more complex logic.
* Requires support for the Intl API in older browsers (pre-2012).

Using `localeCompare()`:

Pros:

* Faster execution time, especially in older browsers where Intl API is not supported.
* Simpler and more lightweight implementation.

Cons:

* Less accurate results, as it relies on a single, fixed locale-specific rule.
* May produce incorrect results for complex comparisons.

**Library and its purpose**

`Intl.Collator` is a JavaScript API provided by the Internationalization (i18n) API. Its primary purpose is to enable locale-aware string comparison and sorting. It's used to handle different language and regional variations in text, such as date formats, currency symbols, and more.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. Both methods rely on standard JavaScript functions (`compare()` for `Intl.Collator` and `localeCompare()`).

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to string comparison or sorting, consider:

1. **String.prototype.localeCompare()**: This method is part of the ECMAScript standard since 2008 and provides a way to compare strings based on locale-specific rules.
2. **Array.prototype.sort() with a custom comparator**: You can define a custom comparison function using an arrow function (`(a, b) => ...`) to achieve similar results to `Intl.Collator.compare()`.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not provide the same level of accuracy as `Intl.Collator` or `localeCompare()`, depending on your specific use case.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:99.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/99.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 99 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
localeCompare()	68.4 Ops/sec
Intl.Collator.compare()	2275.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Intl.Collator.compare() vs localeCompare() with Map (version: 4)

Comparing performance of: localeCompare() vs Intl.Collator.compare()

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

localeCompare()

Intl.Collator.compare()

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):