Benchmark: string to ~~ vs parseInt vs Number vs parseFloat vs...

Script Preparation code:

var strA = "420343343242";
var strB = "420343343243";

Tests:

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

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

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

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the JavaScript microbenchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of various ways to interpret strings in JavaScript. The test cases cover different approaches:

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

**Library and Special JS Features**

In this benchmark, the `Number` function is used as a reference implementation for comparing other methods.

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Options Compared**

The options compared are different ways to interpret strings in JavaScript. Each option has its pros and cons:

1. **`~~` (bitwise NOT)**: This method uses the bitwise NOT operator (`~`) to interpret the string as an integer. It's a simple and straightforward approach, but it can be slow and may not work well with all input values.
	* Pros: Simple, easy to implement
	* Cons: May produce incorrect results for certain input values, slow performance
2. **`parseInt`**: This method uses the `parseInt` function to interpret the string as an integer. It's a built-in JavaScript function that can handle a wide range of input values.
	* Pros: Fast, accurate for most input values
	* Cons: May not work well with all input values (e.g., strings containing non-numeric characters)
3. **`Number`**: This method uses the `Number` function to interpret the string as an integer. It's a built-in JavaScript function that can handle a wide range of input values.
	* Pros: Fast, accurate for most input values
	* Cons: May not work well with all input values (e.g., strings containing non-numeric characters)
4. **`parseFloat`**: This method uses the `parseFloat` function to interpret the string as a floating-point number. It's similar to `Number`, but designed specifically for decimal numbers.
	* Pros: Fast, accurate for most input values
	* Cons: May not work well with all input values (e.g., strings containing non-numeric characters)
5. **Addition with 0 (`+0`)**: This method uses the unary plus operator (`+`) to interpret the string as an integer.
	* Pros: Fast, accurate for most input values
	* Cons: May not work well with all input values (e.g., strings containing non-numeric characters)
6. **Multiplication by 1 (`*1`)**: This method uses the multiplication operator (`*`) to interpret the string as an integer.
	* Pros: Fast, accurate for most input values
	* Cons: May not work well with all input values (e.g., strings containing non-numeric characters)
7. **Subtraction by 0 (`-0`)**: This method uses the subtraction operator (`-`) to interpret the string as an integer.
	* Pros: Fast, accurate for most input values
	* Cons: May not work well with all input values (e.g., strings containing non-numeric characters)
8. **Unary plus (`+`)**: This method uses the unary plus operator (`+`) to interpret the string as an integer.
	* Pros: Fast, accurate for most input values
	* Cons: May not work well with all input values (e.g., strings containing non-numeric characters)
9. **Left shift by 0 (`<<0`)**: This method uses the left shift operator (`<<`) to interpret the string as an integer.
	* Pros: Fast, accurate for most input values
	* Cons: May not work well with all input values (e.g., strings containing non-numeric characters)

**Conclusion**

The benchmark measures the performance of different ways to interpret strings in JavaScript. The results show that `parseInt`, `Number`, and `parseFloat` are generally faster than the other methods, while `+0`, `*1`, `-0`, and `<<0` can be slower due to their limitations on input values. However, the best approach depends on the specific use case and requirements.

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	4874193.0 Ops/sec
parseInt	2476162.2 Ops/sec
Number	2589516.8 Ops/sec
parseFloat	2535115.0 Ops/sec
+0	9370053.0 Ops/sec
*1	4860354.0 Ops/sec
-0	4812953.0 Ops/sec
+	5026182.5 Ops/sec
<<0	4837745.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

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

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

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

notnot

parseInt

Number

parseFloat

+0

*1

-0

+

<<0

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):