Benchmark: Intl.Collator.compare() vs Intl.Collator.compare({numeric: true})

Script Preparation code:

var a = "FOO BAR";
var b = "foo bar";

var nonNumeric = new Intl.Collator(undefined, {
  sensitivity: 'base',
  numeric: false,
});
var numeric = new Intl.Collator(undefined, {
  sensitivity: 'base',
  numeric: true,
});

Tests:

Numeric: false
nonNumeric.compare(a, b) === 0
Numeric: true
numeric.compare(a, b) === 0

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Numeric: false
Numeric: true

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 135 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Numeric: false	27411514.0 Ops/sec
Numeric: true	27197070.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and some pros and cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is testing two approaches to compare strings using the `Intl.Collator` API in JavaScript:

1. Using `Intl.Collator` with no additional options (i.e., `sensitivity: 'base'`, `numeric: false`)
2. Using `Intl.Collator` with the `numeric` option set to `true`

**What's being tested?**

The benchmark is testing whether these two approaches produce the same results for comparing strings that contain both alphabetic and numeric characters.

**Options comparison**

The two approaches are compared in terms of:

1. **Sensitivity**: The sensitivity level used by `Intl.Collator`. In this case, both approaches use `sensitivity: 'base'`, which means the collator will compare strings based on their base characters (alphabetic or numeric).
2. **Numeric**: Whether to treat numeric characters as part of the string comparison. This is where the two approaches differ.

**Pros and cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

**Approach 1: `Intl.Collator` with no additional options (`numeric: false`)**

Pros:

* Lightweight and simple
* Works well for most cases, including non-numeric strings

Cons:

* May not work correctly for numeric strings, as it won't treat them as part of the comparison
* May produce incorrect results if the input string contains both alphabetic and numeric characters

**Approach 2: `Intl.Collator` with `numeric: true`**

Pros:

* Treats numeric characters as part of the string comparison, which can improve accuracy for strings containing numbers
* Works well for both alphabetic and numeric strings

Cons:

* More complex and may be slower than Approach 1
* May produce incorrect results if the input string contains non-numeric characters

**Library: `Intl.Collator`**

The `Intl.Collator` API is a part of the ECMAScript Internationalization API, which provides support for comparing strings based on cultural and linguistic rules. The `Intl.Collator` class is used to create a collator object that can be used to compare strings.

**Special JS feature or syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. It's purely focused on comparing the performance of two approaches using the `Intl.Collator` API.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to the `Intl.Collator` API, here are a few options:

1. **String comparison functions**: You can use built-in string comparison functions like `localeCompare()` or `compare()` to compare strings.
2. **Regular expressions**: Regular expressions can be used to extract numeric characters from strings and then perform a numerical comparison.
3. **Custom collator implementation**: If you need more control over the comparison process, you can implement your own custom collator using JavaScript.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not offer the same level of accuracy or cultural sensitivity as `Intl.Collator`.

Related benchmarks:

Intl.Collator.compare() vs Intl.Collator.compare({numeric: true}) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Numeric: false vs Numeric: true

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Numeric: false

Numeric: true

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):