Benchmark: string-interpolation-vs-to-string

Script Preparation code:

var luckyNumber = Math.round(Math.random() * 100);

Tests:

string-interpolation
`${luckyNumber}`
to-string
luckyNumber.toString()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
string-interpolation
to-string

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/107.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 107 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
string-interpolation	276152320.0 Ops/sec
to-string	1121664000.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing two different approaches to string conversion in JavaScript: using template literals (string interpolation) versus explicitly calling the `toString()` method on a variable.

The script preparation code generates a random integer between 0 and 100, which will be used as input for the benchmarks. The HTML preparation code is empty, indicating that no specific HTML setup is required for this benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **string-interpolation**: This test case uses template literals to convert the `luckyNumber` variable into a string. Template literals in JavaScript allow you to embed expressions inside backticks (``) and use them as placeholders. When the string is evaluated, the expression is replaced with its result.
2. **to-string**: This test case explicitly calls the `toString()` method on the `luckyNumber` variable to convert it into a string.

**Comparison of Options**

The two approaches have different performance characteristics:

* **String Interpolation (Template Literals)**: This approach is generally faster because it avoids the overhead of calling a method and parsing the expression. Template literals are optimized for performance, as they can take advantage of tree shaking and other optimization techniques.
* **Explicit `toString()` Call**: This approach requires more CPU cycles because it involves:
	+ Calling the `toString()` method on the object
	+ Parsing the result to extract the numeric value
	+ Converting the string back into an integer (if necessary)

**Pros and Cons**

* **String Interpolation**:
	+ Pros: Generally faster, more readable, and easier to maintain.
	+ Cons: May not be compatible with all environments or legacy JavaScript versions.
* **Explicit `toString()` Call**:
	+ Pros: More control over the conversion process, works in older JavaScript versions.
	+ Cons: Slower performance, less readable.

**Libraries and Special JS Features**

There are no libraries used in this benchmark. However, if you were to add a library, it might be something like `dompurify` or `js-stringify`, which provide utility functions for working with strings in JavaScript.

No special JS features are being tested in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches for string conversion in JavaScript include:

* Using the `parseInt()` method: This involves parsing a string into an integer using the `parseInt()` function. However, it's generally slower than template literals and explicit `toString()` calls.
* Using the `Number()` constructor: Similar to `parseInt()`, this involves converting a string to a number using the `Number()` constructor. Again, it's not as efficient as template literals or explicit `toString()` calls.

Overall, template literals (string interpolation) are generally recommended for performance and readability reasons. However, if compatibility with older JavaScript versions is necessary, the explicit `toString()` call approach may be required.

Related benchmarks:

string-interpolation-vs-to-string (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: string-interpolation vs to-string

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

string-interpolation

to-string

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):