Benchmark: toLocaleString vs custom thousands seperator4

Script Preparation code:

var number = '1234567';

var addThousandsSeperators = (value) => {
  if (value.length <= 3) return value;
  return Array.from(value).reduce((acc, x, i, a) => (
    (a.length - i) % 3 === 0 && i ? `${acc},${x}` : `${acc}${x}`
  ), '');
};

Tests:

toLocaleString
Number(number).toLocaleString();
custom thousands seperator
addThousandsSeperators(number);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
toLocaleString
custom thousands seperator

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 llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is comparing two different approaches to formatting a number with thousands separators:

1. `Number(number).toLocaleString();`
2. A custom function `addThousandsSeperators()` that manually adds thousands separators to a string representation of a number.

**Description of options and their pros/cons:**

### 1. `toLocaleString()`

This method is part of the built-in JavaScript `Number` object. It returns a string representation of the number with a locale-specific format, including thousands separators if necessary.

Pros:

* Native implementation in modern browsers
* Automatic handling of thousands separators for different locales

Cons:

* Might be slower due to the overhead of native function calls
* Could be less customizable than a custom solution

### 2. Custom `addThousandsSeperators()` function

This function manually adds thousands separators to a string representation of a number.

Pros:

* Potential performance improvement by avoiding native function calls
* High degree of customization (e.g., different separator characters, format styles)

Cons:

* Requires manual implementation and maintenance
* Might be slower due to the complexity of the algorithm

**Other considerations:**

* The custom `addThousandsSeperators()` function uses modern JavaScript features like arrow functions (`=>`) and array methods (`Array.from()`). While this is not a significant issue, it might make the code less readable for developers without experience with these features.
* The benchmark results suggest that the custom implementation outperforms the native `toLocaleString()` method in terms of execution speed.

**Library usage:**

None in this example. The code only uses built-in JavaScript features and functions.

**Special JS feature or syntax used:**

Yes, the custom `addThousandsSeperators()` function uses:

* Arrow functions (`=>`)
* Array methods (`Array.from()`)
* String template literals (not explicitly mentioned, but used implicitly)

These features are relatively modern and widely supported in most browsers and environments. If you're not familiar with them, don't worry – they're just JavaScript sugar for making the code more concise.

**Alternatives:**

You could use other libraries or frameworks to achieve similar functionality. Some examples include:

* Lodash's `toString()` function
* Moment.js' formatting utilities (e.g., `.format()`)
* A custom implementation using regular expressions

Keep in mind that these alternatives might have their own performance and feature trade-offs, so it's essential to evaluate them based on your specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

toLocaleString vs custom thousands seperator4 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: toLocaleString vs custom thousands seperator

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

toLocaleString

custom thousands seperator

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):