Benchmark: toFixed vs toPrecision vs bitwise 2

Script Preparation code:

var someFloat = 0.123456789;

Tests:

toFixed(4)
someFloat.toFixed(4)
toPrecision(4)
someFloat.toPrecision(4)
(someFloat*10000|0)/10000
(someFloat*10000|0)/10000

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
toFixed(4)
toPrecision(4)
(someFloat*10000\|0)/10000

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 dive into the JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition and Preparation**

The benchmark definition is represented by a JSON object that includes:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark, which is "toFixed vs toPrecision vs bitwise 2".
* `Description`: An empty string indicating no description for this benchmark.
* `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`: These are used to prepare the test environment. In this case, the script prepares a floating-point number `someFloat` with value `0.123456789`.

The individual test cases are defined in an array:

* Each object represents a single test case, which includes:
	+ `Benchmark Definition`: The JavaScript code that will be executed for each test case.
	+ `Test Name`: A descriptive name for the test case.

In this benchmark, we have three test cases:

1. `toFixed(4)`: Converts the floating-point number to a string with four decimal places using the `toFixed` method.
2. `toPrecision(4)`: Converts the floating-point number to a string with four decimal places using the `toPrecision` method.
3. `(someFloat*10000|0)/10000`: Uses a bitwise operation to convert the floating-point number to an integer.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares three different approaches:

1. **toFixed(4)**: Uses the `toFixed` method to convert the float to a string with four decimal places.
2. **toPrecision(4)**: Uses the `toPrecision` method to convert the float to a string with four decimal places.
3. **Bitwise 2**: Uses a bitwise operation (shift and bit manipulation) to convert the float to an integer.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

1. **toFixed(4)**:
	* Pros: Easy to understand, widely supported by browsers.
	* Cons: Can lead to loss of precision due to rounding errors.
2. **toPrecision(4)**:
	* Pros: Similar to `toFixed`, but avoids rounding errors.
	* Cons: Less intuitive for some developers, may not be as well-supported by older browsers.
3. **Bitwise 2**:
	* Pros: Can achieve high performance due to the bitwise operation.
	* Cons: Less readable and maintainable than the other two approaches.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, there is no explicit library usage. However, it's worth noting that `toFixed` and `toPrecision` are built-in methods in JavaScript, which means they don't rely on external libraries.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. The code only uses standard JavaScript operators and methods.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to measure performance, you can consider using:

* **Benchmarking libraries**: Libraries like Benchmark.js or Perfume provide a more structured way of writing benchmarks.
* **WebAssembly-based benchmarks**: WebAssembly provides a platform-agnostic way of running benchmarks on the web.
* **Native code**: Writing native code (e.g., C++) for your benchmark can provide optimal performance, but requires more expertise and setup.

Keep in mind that this benchmark is designed to test the performance of JavaScript's built-in methods (`toFixed` and `toPrecision`) and bitwise operations. If you're looking for alternative approaches, you may want to explore other testing frameworks or libraries.

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/104.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 104 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
toFixed(4)	9835482.0 Ops/sec
toPrecision(4)	8755579.0 Ops/sec
(someFloat*10000\|0)/10000	27421390.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

toFixed vs toPrecision vs bitwise 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: toFixed(4) vs toPrecision(4) vs (someFloat*10000|0)/10000

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

toFixed(4)

toPrecision(4)

(someFloat*10000|0)/10000

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):