Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
localeCompare numeric true vs false
(version: 1)
Comparing performance of:
localeCompare vs localeCompareNumeric vs localeCompareBase
Created:
one year ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var a = 'a200bcd32efg9'; var b = 'a200bcd32efg11'; var comparator = { locale: null, collator: null }; var numericComparator = { locale: null, collator: null }; var baseComparator = { locale: null, collator: null }; var localeCompare = (a, b, locale) => { if (!comparator.collator || comparator.locale !== locale) { comparator.locale = locale; comparator.collator = new Intl.Collator(locale); } return comparator.collator.compare(a, b); }; var localeCompareNumeric = (a, b, locale) => { if (!numericComparator.collator || numericComparator.locale !== locale) { numericComparator.locale = locale; numericComparator.collator = new Intl.Collator(locale, { numeric: true, }); } return numericComparator.collator.compare(a, b); }; var localeCompareBase = (a, b, locale) => { if (!baseComparator.collator || baseComparator.locale !== locale) { baseComparator.locale = locale; baseComparator.collator = new Intl.Collator(locale, { sensitivity: 'base', }); } return baseComparator.collator.compare(a, b); };
Tests:
localeCompare
localeCompare(a, b, 'en-US');
localeCompareNumeric
localeCompareNumeric(a, b, 'en-US');
localeCompareBase
localeCompareBase(a, b, 'en-US');
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
localeCompare
localeCompareNumeric
localeCompareBase
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/125.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 125 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
localeCompare
3936013.0 Ops/sec
localeCompareNumeric
3047264.0 Ops/sec
localeCompareBase
3971653.8 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark measures the performance of three variants of the `localeCompare` function: 1. `localeCompareBase`: uses the default options (`sensitivity: 'base'`) 2. `localeCompareNumeric`: uses numeric-only comparison (`numeric: true`) 3. `localeCompare`: uses locale-specific comparison (with an empty locale object) **Options Comparison** The benchmark compares these three variants of the `localeCompare` function on a specific test case: * `localeCompareBase` + Uses default options for locale and collator + Has a sensitivity setting set to `'base'`, which means it will perform a base-level comparison, ignoring certain characters like accents or diacritics + Pros: generally faster performance due to reduced complexity + Cons: may not provide accurate results in cases where the `'base'` sensitivity is not suitable * `localeCompareNumeric` + Uses numeric-only comparison, setting the `numeric` option to `true` + Pros: provides accurate results for numeric comparisons and can be faster than the default locale-based approach + Cons: may not provide accurate results for non-numeric comparisons, as it will ignore any non-numeric characters * `localeCompare` (without specific locale options) + Uses an empty locale object, which means it falls back to default locale behavior + Pros: provides accurate results for most cases, but may be slower due to the need to fall back to a default locale + Cons: may not provide accurate results in cases where the default locale is not suitable **Library and Framework Considerations** The benchmark uses the `Intl` API, specifically the `Collator` class, which provides locale-specific comparison functionality. The `Collator` class is part of the ECMAScript Internationalization API (ECMAScript 5.1) and is supported by most modern browsers. **Special JavaScript Features and Syntax** None are mentioned in this specific benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some modern JavaScript features like async/await or `let const` might be used in the implementation of the `localeCompare` functions, but they are not explicitly mentioned here. **Other Alternatives** There are other alternatives for implementing locale-specific comparison functionality, such as: * Using a library like `moment.js` or `dayjs` to handle date and time comparisons * Implementing a custom comparison function using regular expressions or string manipulation techniques * Using a different API like the `String.prototype.localeCompare()` method (not recommended due to browser compatibility issues) In summary, this benchmark measures the performance of three variants of the `localeCompare` function, comparing their execution times and accuracy. It's essential to choose the right approach based on the specific use case and performance requirements.
Related benchmarks:
Intl.Collator.compare() vs localeCompare() - natural sort order
localeCompare vs collator.compare vs new Intl.Collator().compare
Intl.Collator.compare('en', {numeric: true}) vs localeCompare('en', {numeric: true})
toLocaleLowerCase vs collator
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?