Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
String
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
toString() vs toString() on strings vs String literals vs String literals on strings vs String() vs String() on strings
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var numbers = [1, 12, 123, 1234, 12345, 123456, 1234567, 12345678, 123456789]; var strNumbers = ["1", "12", "123", "1234", "12345", "123456", "1234567", "12345678", "123456789"];
Tests:
toString()
numbers.forEach(n => n.toString());
toString() on strings
strNumbers.forEach(n => n.toString());
String literals
numbers.forEach(n => `${n}`);
String literals on strings
strNumbers.forEach(n => `${n}`);
String()
numbers.forEach(n => String(n));
String() on strings
strNumbers.forEach(n => String(n));
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (6)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
toString()
toString() on strings
String literals
String literals on strings
String()
String() on strings
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 break down the provided JSON data and explain what is tested in each benchmark. **Benchmark Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website where users can create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks to compare the performance of different approaches on their browsers. The current benchmark consists of six test cases that measure the performance of various string-related operations: `toString()`, `String()`, and using template literals (`${}`). **Benchmark Definitions** The provided JSON data defines two main sections: 1. **Benchmark Definition**: This section provides information about the benchmark being measured, such as its name, description, script preparation code, and HTML preparation code (which is empty in this case). 2. **Individual Test Cases**: This section lists six test cases that measure the performance of specific string-related operations. **Test Case Explanations** Here's a brief explanation of each test case: 1. **`toString()`**: Measures the performance of calling `toString()` on numeric values using the `forEach()` method. 2. **`toString() on strings`**: Similar to the previous test case, but measures the performance of calling `toString()` on string literals using the `forEach()` method. 3. **`String literals`**: Measures the performance of using template literals (`${}`) on numeric values within a `forEach()` loop. 4. **`String literals on strings`**: Similar to the previous test case, but measures the performance of using template literals (`${}`) on string literals within a `forEach()` loop. 5. **`String()`**: Measures the performance of calling `String()` on numeric values using the `forEach()` method. 6. **`String() on strings`**: Similar to the previous test case, but measures the performance of calling `String()` on string literals using the `forEach()` method. **Library and Syntax Considerations** None of the provided test cases use any external libraries or JavaScript features that are not part of the standard language specification. **Browser Comparison** The latest benchmark results show that Chrome 95 is the fastest browser for all six test cases, with varying performance across different test cases. The exact rankings may depend on the specific implementation details and caching behavior of each browser. **Alternative Approaches** If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches or optimizations for string-related operations, here are a few options to consider: * Using `Array.prototype.map()` instead of `forEach()`, as it might provide better performance. * Utilizing `String.prototype.forEach()` or `Array.prototype.forEach.call()` to work around browser limitations. * Investigating the use of WebAssembly (WASM) or other optimized JavaScript engines for improved performance. * Considering the use of third-party libraries like FastJSON or js-stringify, which are optimized for string manipulation and might provide better performance. Keep in mind that these alternatives may require significant changes to your codebase or have trade-offs in terms of complexity, compatibility, or maintainability.
Related benchmarks:
parseInt vs toString vs unary(+)
parseInt vs Number // toString vs String
toString anumber vs string literal a number
Compare String to Number conversion
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?