Benchmark: String() vs .toString() vs ("" +)

Tests:

String()
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(String(num)); }
.toString()
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(num.toString()); }
"" +
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(""+num); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String()
.toString()
"" +

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 provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare three different ways of converting a JavaScript number to a string: using `String()`, `.toString()`, and `"\" +"` (also known as template literals).

**Script Preparation Code**

Since there's no script preparation code provided, we can assume that the benchmark starts from an empty context.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. **`String()`**: This case uses the `String()` function to convert a number to a string.
2. **`.toString()`**: This case uses the `toString()` method to convert a number to a string (note that `toString()` is not a function, but rather a method on the Number object).
3. **`"\" +"`**: This case uses template literals to convert a number to a string.

**What's being tested?**

The benchmark is testing which approach is fastest for converting a large number of integers to strings.

**Options compared**

* `String()`: Creates a new string object using the `String()` function.
* `.toString()`: Uses the `toString()` method on the Number object, which returns a primitive value (a string).
* `"\" +"`: Uses template literals to convert a number to a string. This approach involves concatenating a literal string with the number.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **`String()`**:
	* Pros: Creates a new string object that can be manipulated further.
	* Cons: May incur overhead due to creating a new object.
2. `.toString()`**:
	* Pros: Returns a primitive value, which might be faster than creating an object.
	* Cons: May not provide as much control over the resulting string.
3. `"\" +"`**:
	* Pros: Fast and efficient way to convert numbers to strings using template literals.
	* Cons: Limited control over the resulting string (e.g., no escaping or formatting).

**Library used**

None, this benchmark is self-contained.

**Special JS features/syntax**

Template literals (`"\" +"`), which are a relatively recent feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015.

**Other alternatives**

If you want to test other approaches, you could consider adding more test cases, such as:

* Using `parseInt()` or `parseFloat()` with the `toString()` method.
* Using `concat()` or `join()` methods on arrays of strings.
* Using a different template literal syntax (e.g., `${num}`).
* Testing the performance of using a specific string encoding (e.g., UTF-8).

However, keep in mind that adding more test cases can increase the complexity and overhead of the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

String() vs .toString() vs ("" +) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: String() vs .toString() vs "" +

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

String()

.toString()

"" +

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):