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 definition and test cases.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark tests three different ways of converting an integer value to a string in JavaScript:

1. Using the `String()` function (e.g., `String(num)`).
2. Using the `toString()` method (e.g., `num.toString()`).
3. Using template literals or string concatenation with a template literal (e.g., `num + ""`).

**Options being compared**

The benchmark compares these three approaches in terms of their execution speed, measured in executions per second.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **String() function**: This is the most straightforward way to convert an integer to a string. However, it creates a new string object every time it's called, which can lead to memory allocation overhead. Additionally, modern JavaScript engines might use more efficient internal representations for strings.
	* Pros: Simple and easy to read.
	* Cons: Creates multiple string objects, potentially leading to performance issues.
2. **toString() method**: This is a built-in method that converts an object to a string. It's generally faster than the `String()` function because it avoids creating a new string object.
	* Pros: Faster and more efficient than the `String()` function.
	* Cons: May not be as readable or intuitive, especially for developers who aren't familiar with the `toString()` method.
3. **Template literals or string concatenation with a template literal**: This approach uses template literals (introduced in ECMAScript 2015) to convert an integer to a string. It's often faster and more efficient than the other two approaches because it avoids creating intermediate string objects.

**Pros and cons:**

* Template literals:
	+ Pros: Fast, efficient, and readable.
	+ Cons: Requires modern JavaScript versions (ECMAScript 2015 or later).
* String concatenation with a template literal (`num + ""`):
	+ Pros: Similar performance to template literals.
	+ Cons: May lead to unexpected behavior if the `+` operator is not used carefully.

**Library and special JS feature**

There are no external libraries being used in this benchmark. However, it does utilize modern JavaScript features like template literals (introduced in ECMAScript 2015).

**Other alternatives**

If you want to test alternative approaches for converting integers to strings, some options could include:

1. Using a library like `lodash` or `string-polyfill`, which provide optimized string conversion functions.
2. Experimenting with different string formatting techniques, such as using the `fmt()` function from the `fmtjs` library.
3. Investigating the use of Unicode escape sequences (e.g., `\u0000`) to convert integers to strings.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be directly comparable to the original benchmark, and their performance may vary depending on the specific JavaScript engine and environment being used.

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):