Benchmark: parseInt vs Number vs ~~

Script Preparation code:

var intA = 42.034;
var strB = "42.034";

Tests:

No conversion
var res = intA + strB;
parseInt
var res = parseInt(intA) + parseInt(strB);
Number
var res = Number(intA) + Number(strB);
~~
var res = ~~intA + ~~strB;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
No conversion
parseInt
Number
~~

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:120.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/120.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 120 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
No conversion	745357568.0 Ops/sec
parseInt	743623808.0 Ops/sec
Number	34903272.0 Ops/sec
~~	743337600.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark that tests the performance of three different ways to perform numerical conversions in JavaScript:

1. `parseInt`
2. `Number`
3. `~~` (the bitwise NOT operator, which can be used as a "trick" to convert a string to an integer)

These three methods are compared for their execution speed.

**Options Compared**

The options being compared are the different ways to perform numerical conversions in JavaScript:

1. **parseInt**: Converts a string to an integer using the `parseInt` function.
2. **Number**: Converts a string to a number using the `Number` function.
3. **~~**: Uses the bitwise NOT operator (`~~`) to convert a string to an integer.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

1. **parseInt**:
	* Pros: Portable, widely supported, and relatively fast.
	* Cons: Can lead to unexpected behavior if the input string is not in the expected format (e.g., "42.034" would be converted to 42).
2. **Number**:
	* Pros: More modern and flexible than `parseInt`, can handle more complex inputs.
	* Cons: May be slower than `parseInt` due to its overhead, and may lead to unexpected behavior if the input string is not in a numeric format.
3. **~~**:
	* Pros: Fast and lightweight, with minimal overhead.
	* Cons: Non-standard and non-portable (not supported by all browsers), can lead to incorrect results if used incorrectly.

**Library**

None of these options rely on any external libraries. They are built-in JavaScript features or operators.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are being tested in this benchmark, other than the `~~` operator which is a bit unconventional but widely supported.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark does not account for the type of input data (e.g., floating-point numbers vs. integers) and may produce different results depending on the specific inputs used.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative methods to perform numerical conversions in JavaScript, some options include:

1. Using a dedicated library like `lodash` or `moment.js`, which provide more robust and feature-rich functions for working with numbers.
2. Utilizing modern JavaScript features like template literals (`${}>)`) or computed property names (e.g., `{ foo: bar }[bar]`) to create dynamic numerical expressions.
3. Implementing custom conversion logic using regular expressions or other string manipulation techniques.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have their own trade-offs and performance implications, so it's essential to evaluate the specific use case and requirements before choosing an approach.

Related benchmarks:

parseInt vs Number vs ~~ (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: No conversion vs parseInt vs Number vs ~~

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

No conversion

parseInt

Number

~~

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):