var myNumber = 3;
const myNumberAsString = String(myNumber);
const myNumberAsString = `${myNumber}`;
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
String() primitive | |
Template literal interpolation |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
String() primitive | 197083216.0 Ops/sec |
Template literal interpolation | 199672368.0 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.
Benchmark Description
The benchmark is comparing two approaches to representing a number as a string in JavaScript:
String()
function (also known as the "primitive" or "function call" approach).${}
).Options Compared
In this case, we have only two options being compared: using the String()
function and using template literal interpolation.
Pros and Cons of Each Approach
String()
Function (Primitive Approach):${}
):String()
, as it eliminates the need for an extra function call.Library Usage
There is no explicit library being used in this benchmark. The String()
function is a built-in JavaScript method, while template literal interpolation is a language feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).
Special JS Feature or Syntax
This benchmark specifically targets the use of template literal interpolation (${}
), which is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ES6.
Other Considerations
When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors:
String()
might be a better option.Alternatives
If you're looking for alternatives to template literal interpolation, you could consider:
lodash.string
or sprintf-js
.