Benchmark: Number.toLocaleString vs Intl.NumberFormat memory pressure

Tests:

Intl.NumberFormat
const currencyPlayNumber = 1; for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++){ const translatedString = new Intl.NumberFormat(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', }).format(currencyPlayNumber); } for (let i = 0; i < 100; i++){ const translatedString = new Intl.NumberFormat(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', }).format(currencyPlayNumber); } for (let i = 0; i < 1000; i++){ const translatedString = new Intl.NumberFormat(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', }).format(currencyPlayNumber); }
Number.toLocaleString
const currencyPlayNumber = 1; for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++){ const translatedString = currencyPlayNumber.toLocaleString(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', }) } for (let i = 0; i < 100; i++){ const translatedString = currencyPlayNumber.toLocaleString(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', }) } for (let i = 0; i < 1000; i++){ const translatedString = currencyPlayNumber.toLocaleString(undefined, { style: 'currency', currency: 'RUB', }) }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Intl.NumberFormat
Number.toLocaleString

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 benchmark and its test cases.

**What is tested:**
The benchmark tests two approaches to formatting currency values in JavaScript:

1. `Number.toLocaleString()` with a custom formatting options object.
2. `Intl.NumberFormat` with a similar custom formatting options object.

**Options being compared:**

* Both approaches use a custom formatting options object with the following properties:
	+ `style`: set to `'currency'`
	+ `currency`: set to `'RUB'`
* The main difference between the two approaches is that one uses `Number.toLocaleString()` and the other uses `Intl.NumberFormat`.

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **`Number.toLocaleString()`**
	* Pros:
		+ Wide browser support (backwards compatibility).
		+ Simple and lightweight implementation.
	* Cons:
		+ Limited customization options compared to `Intl.NumberFormat`.
		+ May not work well with non-English currencies or locales.
2. **`Intl.NumberFormat`**
	* Pros:
		+ More powerful and flexible formatting capabilities.
		+ Better support for internationalization and localization.
		+ Can handle non-English currencies and locales more effectively.
	* Cons:
		+ Lower browser support (may not work in older browsers).
		+ More complex and heavier implementation.

**Library used:**
`Intl.NumberFormat` is a part of the JavaScript standard library, specifically the ECMAScript Internationalization API. It provides a way to format numbers according to the conventions of different locales.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**
None mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives:**

* For formatting currency values, you could also consider using libraries like `moment.js` or `dayjs`, which provide more advanced formatting capabilities.
* Alternatively, you could use a simple string manipulation approach to format the currency value, but this would likely be less efficient and less maintainable than using a library like `Intl.NumberFormat`.

**Benchmark preparation code:**
The benchmark script simply creates two test cases with different approaches to formatting currency values. The test cases are identical except for the function used to format the currency value (`Number.toLocaleString` vs `Intl.NumberFormat`).

Related benchmarks:

Number.toLocaleString vs Intl.NumberFormat memory pressure (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Intl.NumberFormat vs Number.toLocaleString

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Intl.NumberFormat

Number.toLocaleString

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):