Benchmark: tastastasta - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

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

Tests:

number
var res = Number(intA) + Number(strB);
lodash
var reTrim = /^\s+|\s+$/g; var reIsBinary = /^0b[01]+$/i; var reIsBadHex = /^[-+]0x[0-9a-f]+$/i; var reIsOctal = /^0o[0-7]+$/i; function isSymbol(value) { return typeof value == 'symbol' || (isObjectLike(value) && baseGetTag(value) == symbolTag); } function isObjectLike(value) { return value != null && typeof value == 'object'; } function isObject(value) { var type = typeof value; return value != null && (type == 'object' || type == 'function'); } function toNumber(value) { if (typeof value == 'number') { return value; } if (isSymbol(value)) { return NAN; } if (isObject(value)) { var other = typeof value.valueOf == 'function' ? value.valueOf() : value; value = isObject(other) ? (other + '') : other; } if (typeof value != 'string') { return value === 0 ? value : +value; } value = value.replace(reTrim, ''); var isBinary = reIsBinary.test(value); return (isBinary || reIsOctal.test(value)) ? freeParseInt(value.slice(2), isBinary ? 2 : 8) : (reIsBadHex.test(value) ? NAN : +value); } var res = toNumber(intA) + toNumber(strB);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
number
lodash

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_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
number	4769958.5 Ops/sec
lodash	5394613.0 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 on MeasureThat.net.

**What is being tested?**

The provided benchmark tests two different approaches:

1. `number`: This test case measures the performance of a simple addition operation using the built-in `Number()` function in JavaScript. The input values are stored as decimal numbers (`intA = 42.034` and `strB = "42.034"`).
2. `lodash`: This test case measures the performance of a more complex expression that uses the Lodash library's `toNumber()` function to convert non-numeric inputs (strings, symbols, objects) to numbers.

**Options compared**

The two tests compare the following options:

1. Built-in JavaScript `Number()` function vs. custom Lodash `toNumber()` function.
2. Simple addition operation (`var res = Number(intA) + Number(strB);`) vs. more complex expression with multiple checks and conversions (`var res = toNumber(intA) + toNumber(strB);`).

**Pros and Cons**

Here are the pros and cons of each approach:

1. Built-in JavaScript `Number()` function:
	* Pros: Simple, easy to understand, and widely supported.
	* Cons: May not handle all edge cases or unexpected input types well.
2. Custom Lodash `toNumber()` function:
	* Pros: More comprehensive handling of non-numeric inputs (strings, symbols, objects), but more complex implementation.
	* Cons: Requires the Lodash library to be loaded and may add overhead.

**Library usage**

The test case uses the Lodash library for its `toNumber()` function. The purpose of this function is to convert non-numeric values to numbers, handling various cases such as:

* Strings (with trimming and parsing)
* Symbols
* Objects (using their `valueOf` method or string conversion)

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None mentioned in the provided benchmark definition.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to rewrite the tests without using the Lodash library, you could implement a custom solution for converting non-numeric inputs to numbers. Some approaches might include:

* Using regular expressions to detect and handle different input types
* Implementing a more comprehensive set of checks and conversions using JavaScript functions like `typeof`, `NaN`, and `Number`
* Utilizing other libraries or frameworks that provide similar functionality (e.g., Moment.js for date parsing)

Keep in mind that rewriting the tests without the Lodash library would likely result in a more complex implementation, potentially affecting performance.

Related benchmarks:

tastastasta (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: number vs lodash

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

number

lodash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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