Benchmark: Cast vs Number - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var age = "123"

Tests:

Test 1
+age + 1 === 124
Test 2
Number(age) + 1 === 124

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Test 1
Test 2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Test 1	14881754.0 Ops/sec
Test 2	7997482.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help explain the provided JavaScript microbenchmark!

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is testing two different approaches for incrementing a string value "age" by 1 in JavaScript.

**Options compared:**

There are two options being compared:

1. **String concatenation**: `+age + 1 === 124`
2. **Number() function**: `Number(age) + 1 === 124`

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

**String Concatenation**

Pros:

* Simple and straightforward implementation
* Can be easily understood by new developers

Cons:

* Inefficient use of JavaScript engine resources, as it involves creating temporary strings and concatenating them together.
* May lead to slower performance in certain scenarios.

**Number() Function**

Pros:

* More efficient than string concatenation, as it converts the string to a number immediately and performs arithmetic operations on the underlying numeric value.
* Can be faster for large numbers or complex calculations.

Cons:

* Requires knowledge of the Number() function and its behavior with strings.
* May not work correctly if the input string is not a valid numeric representation.

**Other considerations:**

In addition to the two options being compared, there are some additional factors that may affect performance:

* **String normalization**: In modern JavaScript engines, strings are normalized to a consistent format before execution. This can affect how performance is measured.
* **Type coercion**: When working with strings and numbers, type coercion occurs when JavaScript tries to convert one data type to another. This can introduce overhead.

**Library and its purpose:**

In this benchmark, the `Number()` function is being used as a standard JavaScript function for converting a string to a number. The library or framework being tested does not explicitly mention any specific libraries or frameworks, but rather focuses on the JavaScript engine's performance.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There are no special JS features or syntaxes mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives:**

Some alternative approaches to incrementing a string value by 1 could include:

* Using a template literal with `${age}++` (ES6+)
* Using the `String.prototype.split()` and `String.prototype.slice()` methods
* Using a regular expression to extract the numeric value from the string

However, these alternatives are not being tested in this benchmark.

In summary, this benchmark is testing two common approaches for incrementing a string value by 1 in JavaScript: string concatenation and using the Number() function. The results will help users understand which approach is faster and more efficient for their specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

Cast vs Number (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Test 1 vs Test 2

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Test 1

Test 2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):