Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
String() vs .toString() vs string concatenation
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
String() vs .toString() vs string concatenation
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
String()
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(String(num)); }
.toString()
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(num.toString()); }
string concatenation
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push('' + num); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
String()
.toString()
string concatenation
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the benchmark and explain what's being tested. The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case. The test compares three different approaches to convert a number to a string: 1. `String()`: Using the built-in `String()` function to convert a number to a string. 2. `.toString()`: Using the `toString()` method of the number object to convert a number to a string. 3. String concatenation: Using the `+` operator to concatenate a string literal with the number, effectively converting it to a string. **Options comparison** The three approaches have different performance characteristics: * `String()`: This is likely the fastest approach, as it's a built-in function optimized for performance. * `.toString()`: This method also performs well, but might be slightly slower than `String()` due to additional overhead (e.g., checking if the object has a `toString` method). * String concatenation: This approach is generally slower and less efficient, especially for large numbers of conversions. The reason is that each conversion creates a new string object, leading to memory allocation and garbage collection overhead. **Pros and Cons** Here's a summary of the pros and cons of each approach: * `String()`: + Pros: Fastest, most efficient. + Cons: May not be the first choice for developers due to its unusual syntax. * `.toString()`: + Pros: Slightly faster than String(), more readable syntax. + Cons: Might be slower than `String()` due to additional overhead. * String concatenation: + Pros: Most readable, easy to understand. + Cons: Slowest, least efficient. **Library and special JS feature** There are no libraries or special JavaScript features used in this benchmark. The focus is solely on comparing the three string conversion approaches. **Other alternatives** If you wanted to compare other string conversion methods, you could consider the following: * Using a library like Lodash's `toNumber` function * Using an arrow function with `toString()` * Using a custom implementation of a number-to-string converter Keep in mind that these alternative approaches might not be representative of real-world use cases and may introduce additional overhead or complexity. I hope this explanation helps! Let me know if you have any further questions.
Related benchmarks:
.join vs string builder vs string concatenation
number to string: template literal vs toString vs string literal concat vs string constructor
json stringify vs String() vs int tostring
interpolation vs toString vs concat
number to string: template literal vs toString vs string literal concat vs string constructor(2)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?