Benchmark: String() vs Empty String

Tests:

String()
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(String(num)); }
Empty String
let num = 500; let nums = []; for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) { nums.push(num + ''); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String()
Empty String

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one month ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
String()	978982.9 Ops/sec
Empty String	3348355.2 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The benchmark titled "String() vs Empty String" evaluates the performance of two different ways to convert a number to a string in JavaScript: using the `String()` function and using the concatenation with an empty string. Here’s a breakdown of what is being tested, the pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

### Test Cases Explained

1. **String()**:
   - **Benchmark Definition**: 
     ```javascript
     let num = 500;
     let nums = [];
     for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) {
       nums.push(String(num));
     }
     ```
   - **Description**: This approach explicitly calls the `String()` function to convert the number `num` to a string and then pushes it to the `nums` array.
   - **Pros**:
     - **Clarity**: The intention of converting a number to a string is clear to anyone reading the code.
     - **Formality**: Using `String()` may help avoid any unexpected behavior with concatenation for developers unfamiliar with JavaScript's type coercion rules.
   - **Cons**:
     - **Potentially Slower**: This approach may incur a minor performance overhead due to the function call, depending on the JavaScript engine optimizations.

2. **Empty String**:
   - **Benchmark Definition**: 
     ```javascript
     let num = 500;
     let nums = [];
     for(let i = 0; i < 100; ++i) {
       nums.push(num + '');
     }
     ```
   - **Description**: This approach concatenates the number `num` with an empty string to achieve type coercion, effectively converting the number to a string as well.
   - **Pros**:
     - **Performance**: This method can be faster since it involves a simple concatenation operation rather than a function call.
     - **Simplicity**: It’s a very concise way to convert types, and seasoned JavaScript developers may prefer this for its brevity.
   - **Cons**:
     - **Readability**: The intent may not be as obvious to developers unfamiliar with JavaScript's type coercion, potentially leading to misunderstandings about the behavior of this code.
     - **Ambiguity**: If developers do not realize JavaScript automatically coerces types in certain situations, it can lead to bugs or unexpected results.

### Benchmark Results
The benchmark results indicate the number of executions per second for each approach:

- **Empty String**: 3,348,355.25 executions per second
- **String()**: 978,982.9375 executions per second

From these results, it's evident that using the empty string concatenation method is significantly faster than the `String()` function method.

### Other Considerations
- **JavaScript Engine Optimization**: The performance differences may vary based on the JavaScript engine (e.g., V8, SpiderMonkey) and the specific optimizations implemented in each.
- **Readability vs. Performance**: Developers often have to balance readability and performance. Explicit type conversions (like `String()`) improve readability but may sacrifice performance in some cases.

### Alternatives
Developers have other alternatives for converting numbers to strings, such as using template literals (e.g., `` `${num}```) which are also generally fast and maintain readability. However, it may not perform as efficiently as concatenation or `String()` in every scenario. Each approach has different trade-offs, and the choice may depend on the specific use case and coding standards within a project.

In conclusion, while the empty string concatenation is faster and often preferred for performance-sensitive code, clarity should not be overlooked. Depending on the codebase and team practices, both methods can be valid, and developers should pick the one that aligns best with their needs.

Related benchmarks:

String() vs Empty String (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: String() vs Empty String

Created: one month ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

String()

Empty String

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gpt-4o-mini, generated one month ago):