Benchmark: my round vs toFixed

Tests:

test 1
function round1( value, decimals) { let _decimals = decimals || 0; let roundedValue = parseInt(value * Math.pow(10,_decimals) + 0.5) / Math.pow(10,_decimals); if (roundedValue % 1 == 0) { roundedValue = parseInt(roundedValue); } return roundedValue; } return round1(4.55, 1);
test 2
function round2( value, precisione) { // formato 1,234.56 / F° return Number.parseFloat(value).toFixed( precisione); } return round2(4.55, 1);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test 1
test 2

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/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 121 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
test 1	3103977.5 Ops/sec
test 2	4285733.0 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 provided JSON to understand what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided `Benchmark Definition` json represents two individual microbenchmarks:

1. `round1`: This function takes two arguments, `value` and `decimals`, and returns the rounded value of `value` with the specified number of decimal places.
2. `round2`: This function takes two arguments, `value` and `precisione`, and returns the rounded value of `value` using the `toFixed` method.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:

1. **Manual rounding** (`round1`): This approach uses integer arithmetic to calculate the rounded value.
2. **Floating-point rounding** (`round2`): This approach uses the `toFixed` method, which is a built-in JavaScript function that rounds numbers to a specified number of decimal places.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

Manual Roundin` (Round1)

Pros:

* Generally faster than using `toFixed`
* May be more efficient for small values or specific cases where precision matters

Cons:

* More complex code, potentially harder to understand and maintain
* May not work as expected for certain edge cases or very large values

Floating-Point Roundin` (Round2)

Pros:

* Easier to read and understand than manual rounding code
* Works well for most use cases, including decimal numbers with a fixed precision

Cons:

* May be slower than manual rounding due to the overhead of the `toFixed` method
* Not suitable for all types of numbers or precision requirements (e.g., very large values)

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library usage in these benchmark definitions.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None are mentioned.

Now, let's consider some other alternatives that could be used to compare:

1. **Decimal.js**: A JavaScript library for working with decimal numbers.
2. **Bignumber.js**: A JavaScript library for working with large integers and decimals.
3. **Mathjs**: A math library for JavaScript that provides a range of mathematical functions, including rounding.

These libraries can provide more robust and efficient implementations of rounding algorithms compared to the built-in `toFixed` method or manual arithmetic approaches.

In summary, the benchmark compares two approaches to rounding numbers: manual integer arithmetic (`round1`) versus using the `toFixed` method (`round2`). While manual rounding may be faster in some cases, it's often less readable and maintainable. The choice between these approaches ultimately depends on the specific requirements of the use case.

Related benchmarks:

my round vs toFixed (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: test 1 vs test 2

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

test 1

test 2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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