Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Number.toLocaleString vs Intl.NumberFormat (prepared)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Intl.NumberFormat vs Number.toLocaleString
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
window.predefinedFormatter = new Intl.NumberFormat(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', })
Tests:
Intl.NumberFormat
const currencyPlayNumber = 1; const translatedString = window.predefinedFormatter.format(currencyPlayNumber);
Number.toLocaleString
const currencyPlayNumber = 1; const translatedString = currencyPlayNumber.toLocaleString(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', })
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Intl.NumberFormat
Number.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):
Let's dive into the provided benchmark and explore what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is testing two approaches to format a currency string: using `Intl.NumberFormat` ( Intl ) vs `Number.toLocaleString` ( Local ). **Options Compared** 1. **Intl.NumberFormat**: This method uses the Internationalization API to format a number as a currency string. 2. **Number.toLocaleString**: This method uses the built-in `toLocaleString` method of the `Number` object to format a number as a currency string. **Pros and Cons** **Intl.NumberFormat** Pros: * Provides more control over formatting options (e.g., style, currency code) * Supports more languages and date formats * Can be used for other types of numeric formatting Cons: * May have a higher overhead due to the use of internationalization APIs * May not be supported by older browsers **Number.toLocaleString** Pros: * Generally faster and more lightweight * Widely supported across modern browsers * Simple and intuitive API Cons: * Limited control over formatting options (e.g., style, currency code) * May not work as expected for non-English languages or date formats **Library: Intl.NumberFormat** The `Intl.NumberFormat` library is part of the Internationalization API in JavaScript. It provides a way to format numbers as currency strings, taking into account the user's locale and preferences. The library offers more control over formatting options than the built-in `toLocaleString` method. **Special JS Feature/Syntax: None** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being used in this benchmark. **Other Alternatives** If you need to format numbers as currency strings, but don't want to use the `Intl.NumberFormat` library, you could consider using other libraries like: * moment.js (for formatting dates and times) * numeral.js (for formatting numbers) Alternatively, if you only need basic currency formatting, you might consider using a library like highcharts or chartjs, which provide built-in support for formatted currency values. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The provided script preparation code sets up the `Intl.NumberFormat` library with specific formatting options: ```javascript window.predefinedFormatter = new Intl.NumberFormat(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB' }); ``` This code creates a new instance of the `Intl.NumberFormat` library, passing in an undefined locale (which means it will use the system's default locale) and specific formatting options for Russian rubles (`'RUB'`). This instance is then assigned to the `window.predefinedFormatter` variable.
Related benchmarks:
Number.toLocaleString vs Intl.NumberFormat
test international
Number.toLocaleString vs Intl.NumberFormat memory pressure
Number.toLocaleString vs Intl.NumberFormat (single instance)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?