Benchmark: Int string to ~~ vs parseInt vs Number vs parseFloat vs +0 vs /...

Script Preparation code:

var strA = "1688805315905";
var strB = "1688805315905";

Tests:

notnot
var res = ~~strA;
parseInt
var res = parseInt(strA);
Number
var res = Number(strA);
parseFloat
var res = parseFloat(strA);
*1
var res = strA * 1;
-0
var res = strA - 0;
+
var res = +strA;
<<0
var res = strA<<0;
/1
var res = strA / 1;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
notnot
parseInt
Number
parseFloat
*1
-0
+
<<0
/1

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark that tests different ways to convert a large string (`strA`) to numeric values (int, float) using various methods. The test cases include:

1. `~~` (bitwise NOT)
2. `parseInt`
3. `Number`
4. `parseFloat`
5. Multiplication by 1 (`*1`)
6. Subtraction of 0 (`-0`)
7. Addition with parentheses (`+`)
8. Left shift operator (`<<0`)
9. Division by 1 (`/1`)

**Options Compared**

Each test case compares the performance of a specific method for converting `strA` to a numeric value.

* `~~` is an old-school way to convert a string to an integer using bitwise NOT.
* `parseInt` attempts to parse the string as an integer, with optional radix (base) specification.
* `Number` attempts to convert the string to a number without any additional context.
* `parseFloat` attempts to parse the string as a floating-point number.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here's a brief summary:

1. `~~`: Simple but potentially slow due to the bitwise NOT operation. Can be useful for integer conversions, but may not work correctly for larger integers or non-integer strings.
2. `parseInt`: Fast and widely supported, as it leverages the browser's built-in parsing functionality. However, it may fail if the string is not a valid integer or if the radix specification is incorrect.
3. `Number`: Generally fast and reliable, but may be slower than `parseInt` due to its more straightforward approach.
4. `parseFloat`: Similar to `Number`, but specifically designed for floating-point conversions.

**Other Considerations**

* When using `~~`, it's essential to note that the result is an integer, which might not always be what you expect. For example, a string like `"123.456"` will be converted to `-123` due to the bitwise NOT operation.
* In some cases, `parseInt` may be slower than expected if the radix specification is incorrect or omitted.

**Special JavaScript Features**

There are no special JavaScript features explicitly mentioned in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that modern browsers have various optimizations and built-in functions for performing numeric conversions, such as `Number.prototype.parseInt()` and `Number.prototype.parseFloat()`.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for converting strings to numbers include:

* Using a library like `lodash` or `parse-number`, which provide more robust and flexible parsing functionality.
* Implementing custom parsing logic using regular expressions or other string manipulation techniques.
* Leveraging native WebAssembly (WASM) modules, which can provide improved performance and security.

In conclusion, this benchmark tests various methods for converting large strings to numeric values, providing insights into the relative performance and reliability of each approach. By understanding these differences, developers can choose the most suitable method for their specific use cases.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/114.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 114 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
notnot	4819332.5 Ops/sec
parseInt	2417172.8 Ops/sec
Number	2572446.2 Ops/sec
parseFloat	2519585.8 Ops/sec
*1	4734943.5 Ops/sec
-0	4559056.0 Ops/sec
+	4177191.8 Ops/sec
<<0	3678684.5 Ops/sec
/1	3605511.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Int string to ~~ vs parseInt vs Number vs parseFloat vs +0 vs /... (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: notnot vs parseInt vs Number vs parseFloat vs *1 vs -0 vs + vs <<0 vs /1

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

notnot

parseInt

Number

parseFloat

*1

-0

+

<<0

/1

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):