Benchmark: Intl.Collator.compare() with usage: search vs localeCompare() vs toLowercase()

Script Preparation code:

var a = "FOO BAR";
var b = "foo bar";

var options = {
  sensitivity: 'base',
  usage: 'search',
};

var collator = new Intl.Collator('en', options);

Tests:

localeCompare()
a.localeCompare(b, 'en', options) === 0
Intl.Collator.compare()
collator.compare(a, b) === 0
toLowerCase()
a.toLowerCase() === b.toLowerCase()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
localeCompare()
Intl.Collator.compare()
toLowerCase()

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 dive into the provided JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three different approaches: `toLowerCase()`, `Intl.Collator.compare()`, and `localeCompare()`.

The test uses a simple script preparation code that defines two strings, `a` and `b`, with some differences in case (e.g., "FOO BAR" vs. "foo bar"). The script also creates an instance of the `Intl.Collator` class with specific options to control its behavior.

**Library: Intl.Collator**

The `Intl.Collator` library is a part of the modern JavaScript API, introduced in ECMAScript 2019 (ES10). Its primary purpose is to provide a way to compare strings according to the rules defined by the language's locale. In this benchmark, the collator is used with specific options to determine its behavior.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The `Intl.Collator` library uses some advanced JavaScript features:

*   **Template literals**: The script preparation code uses template literals to define the strings `a` and `b`.
*   **Object creation**: The `options` object is created using curly brackets `{}`.
*   **Object properties access**: The options object is accessed using dot notation (`sensitivity: 'base'`, etc.).

**Options Comparison**

The benchmark compares three different approaches:

1.  **`toLowerCase()`**: This method converts both strings to lowercase before comparison.
2.  **`Intl.Collator.compare()`**: This method uses the collator instance created in the script preparation code to compare the strings according to the locale rules defined by the `sensitivity` and `usage` options.
3.  **`localeCompare()`**: This method also compares strings according to the locale rules, but it's a built-in method of the String prototype.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1.  **`toLowerCase()`**:
    *   Pros: Fast and simple.
    *   Cons: May not handle all edge cases, especially when dealing with non-ASCII characters or Unicode normalization.
2.  **`Intl.Collator.compare()`**:
    *   Pros: More accurate and handles various edge cases, such as sorting and comparing strings with different case sensitivity.
    *   Cons: Requires more resources (time and memory) due to the creation of a collator instance and its complexity.
3.  **`localeCompare()`**:
    *   Pros: Fast and widely supported, as it's a built-in method of the String prototype.
    *   Cons: May not handle all edge cases or provide fine-grained control over locale rules.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches, consider:

1.  **`String.prototype.localeCompare()`**: This is similar to `Intl.Collator.compare()`, but it's a built-in method of the String prototype and might be faster due to its simpler implementation.
2.  **Custom sorting functions**: You can create custom sorting functions using the `Array.prototype.sort()` method, which allows for more control over the sorting algorithm and locale rules.

In summary, the benchmark provides a valuable insight into the performance differences between these three approaches. By understanding the pros and cons of each approach, developers can choose the best solution for their specific use cases.

Related benchmarks:

Intl.Collator.compare() with usage: search vs localeCompare() vs toLowercase() (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: localeCompare() vs Intl.Collator.compare() vs toLowerCase()

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

localeCompare()

Intl.Collator.compare()

toLowerCase()

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):