Benchmark: convert string number

Tests:

parseInt
parseInt('1')
number
Number('1')
+
+'1'

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
parseInt
number
+

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 world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare different approaches for converting strings to numbers in JavaScript. The test cases are:

1. `parseInt('1')`
2. `Number('1')`
3. `+'1'`

These three test cases aim to measure the performance of parsing a string into an integer using different methods.

**Options Compared**

There are three options being compared:

1. **`parseInt()`**: The built-in `parseInt()` function takes a string and returns an integer value. It's a standard JavaScript method for converting strings to numbers.
2. **`Number()`**: The `Number()` constructor is another way to convert a string to a number in JavaScript. However, it can be slower than `parseInt()` because of its more comprehensive parsing process.
3. **String concatenation with the `+` operator**: This test case uses the `+` operator to concatenate the string `'1'` with an empty string (`''`). The result is a new string object that represents the numeric value `1`.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief analysis of each option:

* **`parseInt()`**:
	+ Pros: Fast, widely supported, and well-documented.
	+ Cons: May not work correctly with non-numeric strings or strings containing special characters.
* **`Number()`**:
	+ Pros: More robust than `parseInt()`, handling more edge cases.
	+ Cons: Slower performance compared to `parseInt()`.
* **String concatenation with the `+` operator**:
	+ Pros: Simple and easy to understand, but not as performant as the other two options.
	+ Cons: Creates a new string object, which can be unnecessary for simple numeric conversions.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There are no libraries mentioned in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript environments or older browsers might have specific features or polyfills that affect the performance of these tests.

**Other Considerations**

When running benchmarks like this one, it's essential to consider factors such as:

* Browser and device compatibility
* Engine version and platform
* Execution frequency and timing functions

These variables can significantly impact the results of a benchmark. MeasureThat.net seems to account for some of these considerations by using multiple browsers and devices in its tests.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative methods or optimization techniques, here are some suggestions:

* Use `BigInt` instead of `Number()` for large integers.
* Consider using libraries like `fast-integer-parser` or `int-parser` that specialize in parsing integer strings efficiently.
* Experiment with different parser implementations or optimizations, such as caching or memoization.

Keep in mind that benchmarking JavaScript performance is a complex task, and results may vary depending on the specific use case and environment.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
parseInt	12066544.0 Ops/sec
number	12177917.0 Ops/sec
+	144566064.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

convert string number (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: parseInt vs number vs +

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

parseInt

number

+

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):