Benchmark: Intl.Collator.compare() lowercase vs sensitivity #4

Script Preparation code:

var arr = ['A', 'a', 'B', 'b', 'C', 'c', 'D', 'd'];

var options = {
  sensitivity: 'accent'
};

var collator1 = new Intl.Collator(undefined, options);
var collator2 = new Intl.Collator();

Tests:

lowercase
arr.sort((a,b) => collator2.compare(a.toLowerCase(), b.toLowerCase()))
sensitivity
arr.sort(collator1.compare)
Intl.Collator
arr.sort((a,b) => Intl.Collator().compare(a.toLowerCase(), b.toLowerCase()))
localecompare
arr.sort((a,b) => a.toLowerCase().localeCompare(b.toLowerCase()))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lowercase
sensitivity
Intl.Collator
localecompare

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 provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different approaches for comparing strings in JavaScript: `localeCompare`, using an `Intl.Collator` instance, and using an `Intl.Collator` instance with specific options. The test case compares the string comparison performance when sorting an array of uppercase and lowercase letters.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates two arrays (`arr`) containing uppercase and lowercase letters. It then creates three `Intl.Collator` instances:

1.  `collator1`: An instance with specific options (`sensitivity: 'accent'`)
2.  `collator2`: A default instance (no options specified)

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code is empty.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are four test cases, each representing a different approach:

1.  **lowercase**: Sorts the array using only lowercase letters.
2.  **sensitivity**: Sorts the array using an `Intl.Collator` instance with specific options (`sensitivity: 'accent'`).
3.  **Intl.Collator**: Sorts the array using a default `Intl.Collator` instance (no options specified).
4.  **localecompare**: Sorts the array using the native `localeCompare` method.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here's a brief overview of each approach, including their pros and cons:

1.  **localeCompare**:
    *   Pros: Widely supported, efficient, and easy to use.
    *   Cons: May not work as expected for certain locale combinations or edge cases.

2.  **Intl.Collator (default)**:
    *   Pros: More accurate than `localeCompare` for some locales and uses accent sensitivity by default.
    *   Cons: Requires an additional import and may have slower performance compared to `localeCompare`.

3.  **Intl.Collator (sensitivity: 'accent')**:
    *   Pros: Provides more precise comparison results, especially for accented characters.
    *   Cons: May introduce additional overhead due to the specific options.

**Libraries and Special JS Features**

*   `Intl.Collator`: A built-in JavaScript library that provides support for comparing strings in a locale-specific manner. It's used extensively in modern web development for tasks like sorting, filtering, and formatting dates and numbers.
    *   Purpose: To provide a standardized way of comparing strings, taking into account the local language and regional settings.

No special JS features are mentioned in this benchmark.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/129.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 129 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lowercase	1839334.0 Ops/sec
sensitivity	2891037.0 Ops/sec
Intl.Collator	49208.3 Ops/sec
localecompare	5341389.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Intl.Collator.compare() lowercase vs sensitivity #4 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lowercase vs sensitivity vs Intl.Collator vs localecompare

Created: one month ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lowercase

sensitivity

Intl.Collator

localecompare

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):