Benchmark: Compare String to Number conversion

Script Preparation code:

var numbers = [1, 12, 123, 1234, 12345, 123456, 1234567, 12345678, 123456789];
var strNumbers = ["1", "12", "123", "1234", "12345", "123456", "1234567", "12345678", "123456789"];

Tests:

parse int
strNumbers.forEach(n => parseInt(n, 10));
multiply
strNumbers.forEach(n => n*1);
Number
strNumbers.forEach(n => Number(n));

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
parse int
multiply
Number

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 and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares three ways to convert strings to numbers:

1. `parseInt(n, 10)` - This method attempts to parse a string as an integer using base 10 (decimal).
2. `n*1` - This is a simple multiplication approach that converts the string value to a number by multiplying it with 1.
3. `Number(n)` - This method uses the built-in `Number()` function to convert a string to a number.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares these three approaches in terms of performance, specifically how many executions per second (executions/second) they can handle on a given system configuration.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

1. **`parseInt(n, 10)`**:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient for large strings or numbers with decimal points.
	* Cons: May fail if the string is not in a valid numeric format, which can lead to NaN (Not a Number) values.
2. **`n*1`**:
	* Pros: Simple and straightforward, no risk of NaN values.
	* Cons: May be slower than `parseInt(n, 10)` due to unnecessary multiplication.
3. **`Number(n)`**:
	* Pros: Most efficient and reliable way, handles invalid numeric strings by returning NaN.
	* Cons: May be slower than the other two approaches.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There are no external libraries used in this benchmark, but it's worth noting that `Number()` function is a built-in JavaScript function that uses the ECMAScript standard to convert a string to a number.

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to rewrite this benchmark with alternative approaches, some options could be:

1. Using `BigInt` (introduced in ECMAScript 2017) for larger numbers.
2. Implementing your own parsing logic using regular expressions or other algorithms.
3. Using a Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler to optimize the performance of each approach.

However, these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark and might not provide noticeable improvements over the existing approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Compare String to Number conversion (version: 0)

Compare String to Number conversion

Comparing performance of: parse int vs multiply vs Number

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

parse int

multiply

Number

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):