Benchmark: Number() vs Unary plus vs parseInt vs parseFloat

Tests:

Number(intString)
Number("100")
+intString
+"100"
parseInt(intString)
parseInt("100")
parseFloat(intString)
parseFloat("100")
Number(floatString)
Number("25.0295")
+floatString
+"25.0295"
parseInt(floatString)
parseInt("25.0295")
parseFloat(floatString)
parseFloat("25.0295")

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Number(intString)
+intString
parseInt(intString)
parseFloat(intString)
Number(floatString)
+floatString
parseInt(floatString)
parseFloat(floatString)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/122.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/122.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 122 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Number(intString)	20652108.0 Ops/sec
+intString	301497728.0 Ops/sec
parseInt(intString)	20532782.0 Ops/sec
parseFloat(intString)	20020558.0 Ops/sec
Number(floatString)	20668078.0 Ops/sec
+floatString	310932736.0 Ops/sec
parseInt(floatString)	20330774.0 Ops/sec
parseFloat(floatString)	13724247.0 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 details of the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of different methods for converting strings to numbers in JavaScript. The benchmark tests four scenarios:

1. `Number()` function
2. Unary plus (`+`) operator
3. `parseInt()` function
4. `parseFloat()` function

These methods are compared for two types of input strings: integer-only strings (e.g., "100") and floating-point numbers with decimal points (e.g., "25.0295").

**Options Compared**

Here's a brief overview of each option being tested:

1. **`Number()` function**: This method attempts to convert the string directly to a number using the `Number()` function.
2. **Unary plus (`+`) operator**: In JavaScript, the unary plus operator can be used to convert a string to a number. For example, `+` "100" will return 100.
3. **`parseInt()` function**: This method parses a string as an integer, returning the decimal value of the specified number. The second argument (optional) specifies the radix (base).
4. **`parseFloat()` function**: Similar to `parseInt()`, but it returns a floating-point number.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each option:

1. **`Number()` function**:
	* Pros: Simple, straightforward approach.
	* Cons: May involve additional parsing or rounding steps, which can impact performance.
2. **Unary plus (`+`) operator**:
	* Pros: Fast and lightweight, as it's a simple arithmetic operation.
	* Cons: May not work correctly for non-numeric strings or strings with decimal points without a radix argument.
3. **`parseInt()` function**:
	* Pros: Can be useful when converting to integers, but can introduce additional overhead due to parsing steps.
	* Cons: Limited flexibility, as it only returns an integer value.
4. **`parseFloat()` function**:
	* Pros: More flexible than `parseInt()`, allowing for floating-point numbers, but still involves some parsing overhead.
	* Cons: May not be suitable for all use cases, such as converting integers to floats.

**Library and Special Features**

None of the test cases explicitly use a JavaScript library or special features like ES modules, async/await, or destructuring. However, it's worth noting that the benchmark is likely running in a modern browser environment, which may have additional features or optimizations enabled by default.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches for converting strings to numbers might include:

* Using regular expressions (regex) to extract and parse numeric values from the string.
* Utilizing third-party libraries like ` numeral.js` or `parsefloat`.
* Implementing custom parsing logic using a finite state machine or recursive functions.
* Leveraging browser-specific features, such as `Number()` with a radix argument (e.g., `Number("100", 10)`).

Keep in mind that these alternatives might introduce additional complexity, dependencies, or performance overhead compared to the simple methods tested in this benchmark.

If you'd like me to elaborate on any specific aspect of the benchmark or provide more information on alternative approaches, feel free to ask!

Related benchmarks:

Number() vs Unary plus vs parseInt vs parseFloat (version: 0)

Converting strings to numbers

Comparing performance of: Number(intString) vs +intString vs parseInt(intString) vs parseFloat(intString) vs Number(floatString) vs +floatString vs parseInt(floatString) vs parseFloat(floatString)

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Number(intString)

+intString

parseInt(intString)

parseFloat(intString)

Number(floatString)

+floatString

parseInt(floatString)

parseFloat(floatString)

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):