Benchmark: Intl.Collator.compare() vs localeCompare() 22

Script Preparation code:

var a = "FOO BAR";
var b = "foo bar";

var options = {
  sensitivity: 'base'
};

Tests:

localeCompare()
a.localeCompare(b, undefined, options) === 0
Intl.Collator.compare()
const collator = new Intl.Collator(undefined, options); collator.compare(a, b) === 0

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
localeCompare()
Intl.Collator.compare()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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/111.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 111 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
localeCompare()	221776.2 Ops/sec
Intl.Collator.compare()	216020.2 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Explanation**

The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between two JavaScript functions: `localeCompare()` and `Intl.Collator().compare()`. Both functions are used to compare strings in a locale-aware manner, but they differ in their approach.

**Options Comparison**

Two options are being compared:

1. **sensitivity**: This option controls how sensitive the comparison should be. The two options are:
	* `'base'`: This is the default sensitivity level. It compares characters based on their Unicode code points.
	* `-'variant'`: This option considers variant forms of letters, such as "ss" in "iss". When set to this value, the function will perform a more aggressive comparison.

The pros and cons of these options are:

* `'base'`:
	+ Pros: Less aggressive, faster performance.
	+ Cons: May not handle all variant forms correctly.
* `-'variant'`:
	+ Pros: More accurate handling of variant forms, but slower performance due to the increased complexity.
	+ Cons: May be slower for certain use cases.

**Library and Purpose**

In this benchmark, the `Intl.Collator()` library is used. This library provides a way to perform locale-aware string comparisons. The `Collator` class takes an options object as a parameter, which can include the sensitivity level.

The purpose of using `Intl.Collator()` in this benchmark is to test how different browser implementations handle locale-aware string comparisons with varying levels of sensitivity.

**Special JS Feature**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. The code is straightforward and uses standard JavaScript features.

**Other Alternatives**

For a similar benchmark, you could compare:

1. `String.prototype.localeCompare()` (similar to `localeCompare()`)
2. `TextEncoder().encode()` and `TextDecoder().decode()` for encoding and decoding strings
3. `Buffer` and `Buffer.compare()` for comparing binary data

Related benchmarks:

Intl.Collator.compare() vs localeCompare() 22 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: localeCompare() vs Intl.Collator.compare()

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

localeCompare()

Intl.Collator.compare()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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