Benchmark: Intl.NumberFormt vs Regexp

Script Preparation code:

const translatedString = new Intl.NumberFormat(undefined, {
    style: 'currency',
    currency: 'RUB',
})

Tests:

Intl.NumberFormat
const currencyPlayNumber = 1; translatedString.format(currencyPlayNumber);
Regex
const currencyPlayNumber = 1; const translatedString = `${currencyPlayNumber}`.replace(/\B(?=(\d{3})+(?!\d))/g, ',');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Intl.NumberFormat
Regex

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
Intl.NumberFormat	0.0 Ops/sec
Regex	34552068.0 Ops/sec

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 explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to format currency numbers: `Intl.NumberFormt` (with the help of a `NumberFormat` object) and regular expressions (`Regex`).

**Options Compared**

There are two options compared:

1. **Intl.NumberFormt**: This is an internationalization API provided by JavaScript, which allows you to format numbers according to the conventions of different cultures and locales.
2. **Regular Expressions (Regex)**: This is a technique for matching patterns in strings using regular expression syntax.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

**Intl.NumberFormt:**

Pros:

* More readable and maintainable code
* Less prone to errors due to the library's built-in validation and formatting logic
* Supports internationalization and localization

Cons:

* May be slower than Regex due to the overhead of using an external library
* Requires more setup and configuration (e.g., selecting a locale and culture)

**Regular Expressions (Regex):**

Pros:

* Fastest execution time, as it doesn't involve any additional library or framework overhead
* Can be very flexible and powerful for complex formatting tasks

Cons:

* More difficult to read and maintain due to the complex syntax and pattern matching rules
* Prone to errors if not implemented correctly
* Limited support for internationalization and localization

**Library Used: Intl.NumberFormat**

The `Intl.NumberFormat` library is used to format numbers according to the conventions of different cultures and locales. It provides a simple and consistent way to display currency values, including formatting options like decimal separators, thousand separators, and currency symbols.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax (None)**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The code is straightforward and follows standard JavaScript best practices.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring other alternatives for formatting currency numbers, here are a few options:

1. **JavaScript libraries**: There are several JavaScript libraries available that provide formatting functions for currency numbers, such as jQuery's `currency` plugin or the `money.js` library.
2. **Custom implementation**: You can also implement your own custom formatting function using regular expressions and string manipulation techniques.
3. **Built-in methods**: In modern browsers, you can use built-in methods like `String.prototype.replace()` and `Intl.NumberFormat` to format currency numbers.

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives has its pros and cons, and the best choice will depend on your specific requirements and constraints.

Related benchmarks:

Intl.NumberFormt vs Regexp (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Intl.NumberFormat vs Regex

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Intl.NumberFormat

Regex

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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