Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Test rgecg
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
url vs long
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var REGEX_URL=".*[^a-z].*";
Tests:
url
"http://www.google.com?q=Georgi+Facello".match(REGEX_URL)
long
"zwexcvbfytuhijgfvyghjvndveyusbhfdcjnmgbycfhjnmtberuncimv2345678bimfrvekmocdjnxhhbhebvhdmbfxvhebmfvhbxvmehbvnxmehfmvjehxbvjehmbxehbvhvhrvnm".match(REGEX_URL)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
url
long
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. In this analysis, we'll break down the provided JSON benchmark definition, explaining what's being tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition consists of two test cases: 1. `url`: Tests the performance of a URL matching using the regular expression `REGEX_URL`. 2. `long`: Tests the performance of a long string matching using the same regular expression `REGEX_URL`. The script preparation code for both tests is identical, using a regex pattern to match non-alphabetic characters in URLs: ```javascript var REGEX_URL = "\".*[^a-z].*\""; ``` This means that we're testing how fast JavaScript can match a URL against this specific regular expression. **Options Compared** There are two main options being compared: 1. **`url` test**: Tests the matching of a short, valid URL. 2. **`long` test**: Tests the matching of a long, invalid string (a sequence of random characters). The pros and cons of these approaches are: * **Pros**: + `url` test: This is a more typical use case for regular expression matching, as it's commonly used to validate URLs. + `long` test: This tests the performance of matching long strings, which can help identify issues with regex engine optimization or string handling. * **Cons**: + `url` test may not accurately represent real-world usage, as most URLs are much shorter than this example. + `long` test may be skewed by the random characters in the input string, making it harder to compare results across different browsers. **Library Usage** There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's likely that the JavaScript runtime (e.g., V8) and its regex engine are being used under the hood to execute the regular expressions. **Special JS Features or Syntax** None of the provided code snippets use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond standard JavaScript and regex. **Other Considerations** * The benchmark definition doesn't specify a specific browser or platform for execution. MeasureThat.net likely executes these tests on multiple platforms and browsers. * The `ExecutionsPerSecond` value indicates how many times each test is executed per second, which can impact the accuracy of the results. **Alternatives** If you were to recreate this benchmark, consider using a more representative input string or URL pattern for the `url` test. For the `long` test, you could use a longer, valid URL or a different input format to avoid skewing the results. Additionally, if you wanted to compare performance across multiple browsers or platforms, you could: * Use a testing framework like JSDOM or WebKit Nightly * Execute the tests on various platforms (e.g., Windows, macOS, Linux) and browsers (e.g., Chrome, Firefox) * Consider using a more robust benchmarking tool like BenchmarkJS
Related benchmarks:
regecx
regecxt
regecxgth
Regex vs URL
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?