Benchmark: Intl.NumberFormt vs Regexp fixed

Script Preparation code:

var 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	3340277.2 Ops/sec
Regex	34817344.0 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 its options.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case named "Intl.NumberFormt vs Regexp fixed". The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: using the `Intl.NumberFormat` API and using regular expressions (Regex) for formatting currency numbers.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the following options:

1. **Intl.NumberFormat API**: This API provides a standardized way to format numbers according to the locale's conventions.
2. **Regular Expressions (Regex)**: A string-matching algorithm used for searching patterns in strings.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Intl.NumberFormat API**
	* Pros:
		+ Provides a standardized, locale-aware way to format numbers.
		+ Can handle various number formats, including currency.
		+ Often faster than Regex due to optimized native implementation.
	* Cons:
		+ May not work in older browsers or environments that don't support the API.
2. **Regular Expressions (Regex)**
	* Pros:
		+ Works in most modern browsers and environments.
		+ Can be used for more complex string matching tasks.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower than Intl.NumberFormat due to the overhead of regular expression parsing and execution.

**Library and Its Purpose**

The `Intl` library is a part of the JavaScript standard library. It provides a set of APIs for working with internationalization and localization features, such as formatting numbers, dates, and times. The `NumberFormat` API is a subset of these features, specifically designed for formatting numbers according to locale conventions.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special feature or syntax used in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that the Intl.NumberFormat API relies on the browser's support for Unicode and locale-specific data, which may not be available in all environments.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to format currency numbers using a different approach, other alternatives might include:

1. **Using a third-party library**: Libraries like Moment.js or numeral.js provide additional formatting options, including currency formatting.
2. **Implementing custom formatting**: You can write your own custom function to format currency numbers using string concatenation and regular expressions.

In summary, the benchmark compares the performance of two approaches for formatting currency numbers: Intl.NumberFormat API and regular expressions. The Intl.NumberFormat API is generally faster and more reliable, but may not work in older browsers or environments.

Related benchmarks:

Intl.NumberFormt vs Regexp fixed (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):