Benchmark: parseInt vs Number conversion test 2

Script Preparation code:

var numberStrings = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
  numberStrings.push((new Date()).valueOf().toString());
}

Tests:

No conversion
for(var i = 0; i < numberStrings.length; i++) { var res = numberStrings[i]; }
parseInt
for(var i = 0; i < numberStrings.length; i++) { var res = parseInt(numberStrings[i], 10); }
Number
for(var i = 0; i < numberStrings.length; i++) { var res = Number(numberStrings[i]); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
No conversion
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 break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three different methods for converting string representations of numbers: `parseInt`, `Number`, and no conversion (i.e., using the `+` operator). The test case creates an array of 1000 strings, each representing a timestamp in milliseconds, using the `new Date().valueOf()` method.

**Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. **No Conversion**: This test case uses the `+` operator to convert each string to a number. It's worth noting that this approach can be vulnerable to errors if the input strings don't represent valid numbers.
2. **parseInt**: This test case uses the `parseInt()` method with base 10 (i.e., decimal) to convert each string to a number. The `parseInt` function is useful when you want to parse a string as a specific type, such as an integer or a floating-point number.
3. **Number**: This test case uses the built-in `Number()` function to convert each string to a number.

**Library and Special JS Features**

*   There are no external libraries used in this benchmark.
*   The `new Date().valueOf()` method is a special JavaScript feature that returns the timestamp of the current date in milliseconds. It's a widely supported and reliable way to generate random numbers for testing purposes.

**Options Comparison**

The three test cases offer different approaches to converting strings to numbers:

1.  **No Conversion**: This approach relies on the `+` operator, which can be vulnerable to errors if not used carefully.
2.  **parseInt**: This method provides more control over the parsing process and is generally safer than using the `+` operator. However, it may also lead to slower performance due to the additional function call.
3.  **Number**: This built-in function is often faster and more efficient than using `parseInt`, but its behavior can be less predictable in certain edge cases.

**Pros and Cons**

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

*   **No Conversion**:
    *   Pros: Simple, fast execution.
    *   Cons: Error-prone, vulnerable to input validation issues.
*   **parseInt**:
    *   Pros: More control over parsing process, safer than using `+`.
    *   Cons: Potential performance overhead due to function call.
*   **Number**:
    *   Pros: Fast execution, built-in function minimizes overhead.
    *   Cons: Behavior may be less predictable in certain edge cases.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other alternatives for converting strings to numbers include:

1.  Using a regular expression with the `RegExp` object.
2.  Implementing a custom parsing function using JavaScript's built-in `Math` library and functions like `parseFloat` or `parseInt`.
3.  Utilizing external libraries, such as the popular ` numeral.js` library, which provides more advanced number formatting and parsing capabilities.

It's essential to note that the choice of conversion method ultimately depends on the specific requirements of your project, including performance constraints, security considerations, and personal preference.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 11 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
No conversion	9556.3 Ops/sec
parseInt	3898.3 Ops/sec
Number	3776.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

parseInt vs Number conversion test 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: No conversion vs parseInt vs Number

Created: 11 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

No conversion

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):