Benchmark: Single instance of Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString

HTML Preparation code:


<script> window.formatter = new Intl.NumberFormat("en-US");</script>

Tests:

Intl.NumberFormat
var a = formatter.format("10000");
toLocalString
var a = "10000".toLocaleString("en-US");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Intl.NumberFormat
toLocalString

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.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches for formatting numbers in JavaScript:

1. `Intl.NumberFormat`: This approach uses the Internationalization API to format numbers according to a specific locale (in this case, English-US).
2. `toLocalString`: This approach uses the `toLocaleString` method of the `Number` object to format numbers.

**Options being compared:**

The two approaches are being compared in terms of their performance, specifically the number of executions per second.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **Intl.NumberFormat**:
	* Pros:
		+ Provides more control over formatting options (e.g., decimal separator, thousand separator).
		+ Can handle complex number formats.
	* Cons:
		+ May be slower due to the additional overhead of creating an Internationalization object.
2. **toLocalString**:
	* Pros:
		+ Typically faster than Intl.NumberFormat, as it uses a built-in method.
	* Cons:
		+ Less control over formatting options.
		+ May not handle complex number formats correctly.

**Library and purpose:**

The `Intl` library is part of the JavaScript standard library. It provides functionality for working with internationalization and localization, including date and time formatting, number formatting, and more.

In this benchmark, the `Intl.NumberFormat` approach uses the `NumberFormat` class to format numbers according to a specific locale (in this case, English-US).

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that are not commonly used in everyday development. It's focused on comparing two simple and well-supported approaches for formatting numbers.

**Other alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternative ways to format numbers in JavaScript, you could consider using other libraries like Moment.js or date-fns, which offer more advanced formatting options. However, keep in mind that these libraries may add additional overhead and dependencies to your project.

For simple use cases, the `toLocalString` approach is often sufficient and faster than using Intl.NumberFormat.

Overall, this benchmark provides a good starting point for understanding the performance differences between two commonly used approaches for formatting numbers in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

Single instance of Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString

Created: 4 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Intl.NumberFormat

toLocalString

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):