Benchmark: cached Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocaleString

Tests:

cached Intl.NumberFormat
window.a = window.a || new Intl.NumberFormat("en-US"); var a = window.a.format("10000")
toLocaleString
var a = "10000".toLocaleString("en-US");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
cached Intl.NumberFormat
toLocaleString

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark named "cached Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocaleString". This benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: using `Intl.NumberFormat` with caching and using `toLocaleString`.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared in this benchmark:

1. **cached Intl.NumberFormat**: This approach uses `Intl.NumberFormat` with caching. The script creates a new instance of `Intl.NumberFormat` only once, when it's first accessed (`window.a = window.a || new Intl.NumberFormat("en-US");`). This cached instance is then reused for formatting subsequent numbers.
2. **toLocaleString**: This approach uses the built-in `toLocaleString` method without caching. It simply calls `var a = "10000".toLocaleString("en-US");`.

**Pros and Cons**

**cached Intl.NumberFormat:**

Pros:

* Reuses the cached instance, reducing the overhead of creating a new instance on every call.
* May be faster due to reduced creation time.

Cons:

* Requires a single initial script that creates the cache instance. If this script is not executed before using `Intl.NumberFormat`, the cached instance will not be created.
* May require additional setup or configuration to work correctly, such as setting the locale and currency formats.

**toLocaleString:**

Pros:

* No setup required; simply call `toLocaleString` with the desired format string.
* Easy to use; no need to create a cache instance.

Cons:

* Creates a new instance of `Intl.NumberFormat` on every call, which may be slower due to increased creation time.
* May not be suitable for applications that require frequent formatting of large numbers or values.

**Library and Syntax**

The library used in this benchmark is the Internationalization API (`Intl.`), specifically `NumberFormat` and `toLocaleString`. These APIs provide a way to format numbers according to specific locale and currency formats.

The syntax used in this benchmark is JavaScript, with the use of the `window.a` object to create a cache instance for `Intl.NumberFormat`.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark may not account for other factors that could affect performance, such as memory usage or garbage collection.
* Different browsers or environments might have different behavior when using these APIs.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

1. **Use a library like Moment.js**: Moment.js provides a simple and efficient way to format dates and numbers. It also has built-in support for caching.
2. **Implement your own formatting function**: Depending on the specific requirements of your application, you might be able to implement a custom formatting function that achieves similar performance characteristics to `Intl.NumberFormat` or `toLocaleString`.
3. **Use a different library or API**: Other libraries or APIs, such as `locale-js` or `nls.js`, provide alternative ways to format numbers and dates according to specific locales.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your application's requirements, performance needs, and personal preferences.

Related benchmarks:

cached Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocaleString (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: cached Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocaleString

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

cached Intl.NumberFormat

toLocaleString

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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