Benchmark: Intl.Collator.compare vs localeCompare 2

Script Preparation code:

const minCodePoint = 'a'.charCodeAt(0);
const maxCodePoint = 'z'.charCodeAt(0);
const randomLetter = () => String.fromCharCode(Math.floor(Math.random() * (maxCodePoint - minCodePoint) + minCodePoint));
const createWord = () => Array.from({length: 15}, randomLetter).join('');

var words = Array.from({length: 50000}, createWord);
var collator = new Intl.Collator();

Tests:

Intl.Collator
words.sort(collator.compare);
localeCompare
words.sort((a, b) => a.localeCompare(b))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Intl.Collator
localeCompare

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the details of this benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is comparing two different ways to sort an array of strings in a locale-specific order using JavaScript.

**Test Case 1: Intl.Collator**

In this test case, the `Intl.Collator` API is used to create a collator object that can compare strings in a specific locale. The `collator.compare()` method is then used to sort an array of 50,000 strings. This approach takes into account the locale's sorting rules and is designed to be efficient.

**Test Case 2: localeCompare**

In this test case, the `localeCompare()` method from the String prototype is used to sort the same array of strings. This approach relies on the built-in string comparison functionality provided by JavaScript engines and may not follow locale-specific sorting rules as closely as the Intl.Collator API.

**Comparison Points**

The benchmark compares the execution speed (Executions Per Second) of both approaches on a Chrome browser running on a Mac desktop.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Intl.Collator**: Pros:
	+ Follows locale-specific sorting rules more accurately.
	+ May be more efficient in certain scenarios, such as when dealing with non-ASCII characters.
* Cons:
	+ Requires the Intl.Collator API, which might not be supported in older browsers or environments.
	+ Creates an additional object instance (collator) that consumes memory.
* **localeCompare**: Pros:
	+ Widely supported across all JavaScript engines and browsers.
	+ Simplistic implementation with minimal overhead.
* Cons:
	+ May not follow locale-specific sorting rules as accurately, which could lead to incorrect results in certain cases.

**Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches:

1. **Locale-specific requirements**: If the application requires strict adherence to a specific locale's sorting rules, use Intl.Collator. Otherwise, localeCompare might be sufficient.
2. **Performance considerations**: For large datasets or performance-critical applications, Intl.Collator might offer better efficiency due to its optimized implementation.
3. **Browser and engine support**: If compatibility with older browsers or environments is a concern, consider using localeCompare.

**Other Alternatives**

For sorting strings in JavaScript:

1. **Array.prototype.sort()**: A built-in method that can sort arrays of strings using the default comparison function. This approach might not follow locale-specific rules.
2. **Custom sorting functions**: Developers can create custom sorting functions tailored to specific requirements, but this approach often leads to more complex code and may not be as efficient.

Keep in mind that the best approach depends on your specific use case and priorities (performance, compatibility, or accuracy).

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/117.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 117 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Intl.Collator	214.4 Ops/sec
localeCompare	521.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Intl.Collator.compare vs localeCompare 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Intl.Collator vs localeCompare

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Intl.Collator

localeCompare

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated 27 days ago):