Benchmark: endsWith vs Regex

Tests:

Regex
"this is a test".match("test$")
endsWith
"this is a test".endsWith("test")

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 92 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 74 runs

endsWith

94.0M/s

Regex

8.6M/s

Fastest: endsWith (11.0x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ endsWith: 93,976,336 ops/sec
• Regex: 8,581,422 ops/sec

Firefox 13 runs

endsWith

1558.3M/s

Regex

14.6M/s

Fastest: endsWith (106.6x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ endsWith: 1,558,309,376 ops/sec
• Regex: 14,622,450 ops/sec

Safari 5 runs

endsWith

74.7M/s

Regex

19.4M/s

Fastest: endsWith (3.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ endsWith: 74,656,512 ops/sec
• Regex: 19,381,944 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Regex
endsWith

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/137.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 137 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

endsWith

90.4M/s

Regex

5.3M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ endsWith	90,444,824 Ops/sec
Regex	5,265,262 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll explain the benchmark and its components in detail.

**Benchmark Overview**

The given JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark, where users can compare the performance of different approaches to check if a string ends with a specific substring or pattern. The benchmark is defined by two test cases: `endsWith` and `Regex`.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of two options:

1. **endsWith**: This method returns a boolean value indicating whether the original string ends with the specified substring.
2. **Regex**: This approach uses a regular expression (regex) to search for the specified pattern at the end of the string.

**Pros and Cons**

### EndsWith

Pros:

* Simple and straightforward implementation
* Fast execution, as it only requires a single iteration over the string's characters
* Easy to understand and implement

Cons:

* May not work correctly with non-ASCII characters or Unicode strings
* Can be slower than Regex for large strings due to the overhead of the `endsWith` method

### Regex

Pros:

* Flexible and powerful pattern matching capabilities
* Can handle non-ASCII characters and Unicode strings correctly
* Faster execution for large strings, as it can take advantage of optimized regex engines

Cons:

* More complex implementation, which may lead to errors or performance issues if not implemented correctly
* Slower execution compared to `endsWith` due to the overhead of compiling and executing the regex pattern

**Library**

In the provided benchmark, there is no explicit mention of any libraries being used. However, in general, both `endsWith` and Regex methods are built-in JavaScript functions that do not require any external dependencies.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. Both test cases use standard JavaScript methods and operators.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to compare the performance of other string manipulation approaches, here are some alternatives:

* **Substring**: Instead of checking if a string ends with a substring, you can try using the `substring` method to extract a subset of the original string.
* **indexOf**: You can use the `indexOf` method to search for the specified substring within the original string. If the substring is found at the end of the string, it returns the last index of the match.
* **Regular expressions with anchors**: You can modify the regex pattern to include anchor characters (`^` and `$`) to ensure that the match is performed only at the end of the string.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics compared to `endsWith` and Regex, depending on the specific use case and requirements.

endsWith vs Regex (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `Regex vs endsWith`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Regex

endsWith

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 92 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 74 runs

Firefox 13 runs

Safari 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

endsWith vs Regex (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Regex vs endsWith

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Regex

endsWith

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 92 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 74 runs

Firefox 13 runs

Safari 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Regex vs endsWith`