Benchmark: test - marcel - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

String()
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(String(num)); }
.toString()
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(num.toString()); }
Concatenation
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(num + ''); }
String interpolation
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(`${num}`); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String()
.toString()
Concatenation
String interpolation

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its different approaches.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark measures the performance of three different ways to convert an integer to a string in JavaScript: using the `toString()` method, concatenation (`+`), and template literals (string interpolation).

**Options Compared**

1. **`String()`**: This approach uses the built-in `String()` function to convert the integer to a string.
2. **`.toString()`**: This approach uses the dot notation to call the `toString()` method on the integer value, effectively casting it to a string.
3. **Concatenation (`+`)**: This approach uses the `+` operator to concatenate a string with the integer value, implicitly converting the integer to a string.
4. **String Interpolation (Template Literals)`: This approach uses template literals (the `${}` syntax) to insert the integer value into a string.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **`String()`**: Pros:
	* Most efficient in terms of performance.
	* Widely supported across browsers.
Cons:
	* May not work as expected for very large integers, due to JavaScript's implementation details (e.g., `Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER`).
2. **`.toString()`**: Pros:
	* Similar to the first approach, but uses a more explicit and intuitive syntax.
Cons:
	* May be slightly slower than using the built-in `String()` function.
3. **Concatenation (`+`)**: Pros:
	* Simple and easy to understand.
Cons:
	* Can lead to performance issues for large integers due to the creation of intermediate strings.
4. **String Interpolation (Template Literals)**: Pros:
	* Provides a more modern and expressive syntax for string formatting.
Cons:
	* May not be supported in older browsers or versions of JavaScript.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage mentioned in the benchmark definitions. However, it's worth noting that some implementations might use internal libraries or APIs to optimize performance (e.g., using `BigInt` for very large integers).

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The template literals feature is used in one of the benchmark cases (`String interpolation`). This syntax was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) and provides a more concise way to insert values into strings.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to measure string conversion performance might include:

* Using `Number.toString()` instead of `String()`
* Comparing with other methods, such as using `JSON.stringify()` or constructing the string manually
* Measuring the performance of custom string formatting libraries or frameworks

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be directly comparable to the original benchmark cases.

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/101.0.4951.54 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 101 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
String()	115844.0 Ops/sec
.toString()	1319550.9 Ops/sec
Concatenation	4426137.0 Ops/sec
String interpolation	4415012.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test - marcel (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: String() vs .toString() vs Concatenation vs String interpolation

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

String()

.toString()

Concatenation

String interpolation

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):