Even if it's 30% faster, it won't matter in the end.
Why? because you won't use +x or Number(x) with 1 million operations in a second. You'll use it 99% of the time less than 3 times in a row. 30% is worthless here.
But using Number(x) makes it very easy to understand the intention of the code.
Using +x will be missed by a lot of devs and will only cause trouble.
Readability over pretty much anything, except when you absolutely need the performance, which is very rare. And if you disagree with this, then let's just agree to disagree...
Agree with this. Number is much more noticeable at-a-glance in the source code, whereas any minor improvement in perf doesn't make any practical difference and could easily be erased or reversed by future engine optimizations in any case.
Small correction to my original comment, though — it turns out that since the introduction of the bigint data type, +x and Number(x) are no longer semantically identical: Number(1n) gives 1, whereas +1n throws an error, because bigints can only be explicitly converted to numbers, not coerced. IMO, this is another argument in favor of Number(x), as it consistently works for all data types of x, without throwing (unless you do something crazy like x = { valueOf() { throw '' } }).
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I'm extremely sceptical about this, as any JS engine worth its salt should be able to figure out that
+xhas identical semantics toNumber(x).JSBench confirms no noticeable difference (Chrome 110 on Windows 11) jsbench.me/c9le9hworr/1
I tried perf.link - was faster every time (Firefox and Chrome, Linux and Win11) - up to 30% faster in fact
Even if it's 30% faster, it won't matter in the end.
Why? because you won't use
+xorNumber(x)with 1 million operations in a second. You'll use it 99% of the time less than 3 times in a row. 30% is worthless here.But using
Number(x)makes it very easy to understand the intention of the code.Using
+xwill be missed by a lot of devs and will only cause trouble.Readability over pretty much anything, except when you absolutely need the performance, which is very rare. And if you disagree with this, then let's just agree to disagree...
Agree with this.
Numberis much more noticeable at-a-glance in the source code, whereas any minor improvement in perf doesn't make any practical difference and could easily be erased or reversed by future engine optimizations in any case.Small correction to my original comment, though — it turns out that since the introduction of the bigint data type,
+xandNumber(x)are no longer semantically identical:Number(1n)gives1, whereas+1nthrows an error, because bigints can only be explicitly converted to numbers, not coerced. IMO, this is another argument in favor ofNumber(x), as it consistently works for all data types ofx, without throwing (unless you do something crazy likex = { valueOf() { throw '' } }).