Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
new Intl.NumberFormat vs reused NumberFormat reformatted
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
new Intl.NumberFormat vs reused Intl.NumberFormat
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var a = new Intl.NumberFormat("en-US");
Tests:
new Intl.NumberFormat
var b = new Intl.NumberFormat("en-US").format("10000");
reused Intl.NumberFormat
var b = a.format("10000");
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
new Intl.NumberFormat
reused Intl.NumberFormat
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 break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and some pros and cons of each approach. **What is being tested?** The test consists of two individual test cases: 1. **new Intl.NumberFormat**: Creates a new instance of `Intl.NumberFormat` with the locale "en-US" and formats the string "10000". 2. **reused Intl.NumberFormat**: Reuses an existing instance of `Intl.NumberFormat` created earlier (in the script preparation code) and uses it to format the same string "10000". **Options compared:** The two test cases are comparing the performance of: * Creating a new instance of `Intl.NumberFormat` for each test case (new Intl.NumberFormat). * Reusing an existing instance of `Intl.NumberFormat` created earlier for both test cases (reused Intl.NumberFormat). **Pros and Cons:** **New Intl.NumberFormat:** Pros: * Each instance is unique, so the tests are independent. * Easier to understand and debug, as each test case has a separate instance. Cons: * Creates two instances of `Intl.NumberFormat`, which might lead to unnecessary overhead. * The tests may not accurately reflect real-world usage patterns, where instances are often reused. **Reused Intl.NumberFormat:** Pros: * Reduces overhead by reusing an existing instance. * Can better represent real-world usage patterns, where instances are often reused. Cons: * Tests are less independent, as the results of one test case may depend on the previous instance. * May lead to confusion if not properly documented or explained. **Library and its purpose:** `Intl.NumberFormat` is a part of the Internationalization API in JavaScript. Its purpose is to format numbers according to the specified locale. In this benchmark, `Intl.NumberFormat` is used to format numbers with specific formatting rules for different locales. **Special JS feature/syntax:** There are no special features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark that would require additional explanation. **Other alternatives:** If you wanted to create a similar benchmark, you could consider the following alternatives: * Using `NumberFormat` from a polyfill library like `intl-polyfill`, which provides a fallback for older browsers. * Comparing performance with and without using internationalization (i18n) libraries. * Adding more test cases that explore different locale configurations or formatting options. Keep in mind that benchmarking is an art, and the choice of alternatives will depend on your specific use case and goals.
Related benchmarks:
Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString
Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString ( predefine the NumberFormat instance )
cached Intl.NumberFormat vs toLocalString
new Intl.NumberFormat vs reused NumberFormat
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?