Benchmark: String() vs .toString() vs template string vs. short transform

Tests:

String()
let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(String(i)); }
.toString()
let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(i.toString()); }
template string
let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(`${i}`); }
short cut
let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(""+i); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String()
.toString()
template string
short cut

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 break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is not explicitly stated in the provided JSON, but based on the test cases, it appears to be comparing different ways of converting numbers to strings in JavaScript.

**Test Cases**

There are four test cases:

1. **String()**: This test case uses the built-in `String()` function to convert numbers to strings.
2. **.toString()**: This test case uses the `.toString()` method to convert numbers to strings, which is a standard method for converting objects to strings in JavaScript.
3. **template string**: This test case uses template literals (also known as template strings) to convert numbers to strings. The syntax is `let nums = [];\r\nfor(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) {\r\n  nums.push(`${i}`);\r\n}`, where `${i}` is the expression being evaluated.
4. **short cut**: This test case uses a shortcut method to convert numbers to strings, which is `let nums = [];\r\nfor(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) {\r\n  nums.push(\"\"+i);\r\n}`, where `"`+`i` is the expression being evaluated.

**Library and Special JS Features**

None of these test cases use any libraries. However, template literals are a special JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). The `String()` function and `.toString()` method have been part of JavaScript for a longer time.

**Pros and Cons**

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

1. **String()**: This is a simple and straightforward way to convert numbers to strings, but it may not be the most efficient.
	* Pros: Easy to use, widely supported.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient as other methods.
2. **.toString()**: This method is more explicit than `String()` and can be useful for debugging or logging purposes.
	* Pros: More explicit, easier to understand, and suitable for debugging purposes.
	* Cons: May not be as efficient as template literals.
3. **template string**: Template literals are a convenient way to convert numbers to strings while also allowing for more complex expressions.
	* Pros: Convenient, allows for more complex expressions, and can be more efficient than other methods.
	* Cons: Less intuitive than traditional methods, may require more code.
4. **short cut**: This shortcut method is essentially equivalent to template literals, but uses a different syntax (`"`+`i`).
	* Pros: Similar to template literals, easy to use.
	* Cons: May be less readable or maintainable than other methods.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to converting numbers to strings in JavaScript include:

1. **parseInt()**: This function can convert a string to an integer, but it's not directly equivalent to converting a number to a string.
2. **Number()`**: Similar to `String()`, but converts the input to a Number value instead of a string.

It's worth noting that these alternative approaches may have different use cases and performance characteristics compared to the methods tested in this benchmark.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 16_3 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) CriOS/111.0.5563.72 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile iOS 111 on iOS 16.3

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
String()	106529.3 Ops/sec
.toString()	515508.7 Ops/sec
template string	502894.0 Ops/sec
short cut	506754.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

String() vs .toString() vs template string vs. short transform (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: String() vs .toString() vs template string vs short cut

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

String()

.toString()

template string

short cut

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):