What are the differences between the three ways to javascript cast to string? I found that they all produce the same output, but I’m curious if one method is better than the others. For example, the + “” method saves some characters, but is there anything else to consider?
Using the String Constructor:
var myVar = 123;
var str = String(myVar);
Pros: This approach is explicit, making it immediately clear that you’re performing a javascript cast to string. It’s helpful when you want readability to be a priority, as the purpose is easy to identify.
Cons: It’s a bit longer than other methods, but it does give you that direct readability advantage.
Using Template Literals:
var myVar = 123;
var str = `${myVar}`;
Pros: Template literals are a modern way to javascript cast to string. They’re especially useful when you’re working with multiple variables or adding strings together. This method is versatile and can scale to more complex needs, such as creating multi-line strings.
Cons: For simple conversions, this approach might feel like a bit much, but it’s very readable and adapts well to complex scenarios.
Using Concatenation with an Empty String:
var myVar = 123;
var str = myVar + "";
Pros: This method is super concise for quick javascript cast to string operations, making it a popular choice for developers looking to keep things minimal.
Cons: The downside is that it might be less intuitive at first glance, as it relies on implicit type coercion, which might make it less obvious that a conversion is happening. It’s best for those who are familiar with JavaScript’s type behavior.