Benchmark: Array.includes vs Regex.test

Tests:

Array.includes
const isCeoLevel = ['CEO_STAR','CEO_STAR_CREATOR']; isCeoLevel.includes("CEO_STAR")
Regex.test
const isCeoLevel = /^(CEO_STAR|CEO_STAR_CREATOR)$/; isCeoLevel.test('CEO_STAR');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Array.includes
Regex.test

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: yesterday)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:128.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/128.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 128 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Array.includes	29499530.0 Ops/sec
Regex.test	30007558.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches:

1. `Array.includes`
2. `Regex.test`

**What is being tested?**

In this case, we're testing the performance of checking if a string matches a specific pattern using either an array-based approach or a regular expression (regex) based approach.

**Options compared:**

* `Array.includes`: This method checks if an element exists in an array. In this benchmark, it's used to check if a string (`"CEO_STAR"` or `"CEO_STAR_CREATOR"` ) exists within the `isCeoLevel` array.
* `Regex.test`: This method returns true if the entire regex pattern matches the given string.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

* `Array.includes`:
	+ Pros:
		- Typically faster than using a regular expression (especially for small arrays)
		- Easier to read and maintain
	+ Cons:
		- May require an array to be created upfront, which can lead to memory overhead
		- May not be as flexible as regex patterns
* `Regex.test`:
	+ Pros:
		- Highly flexible and powerful for complex pattern matching
		- Can be used for multiple purposes beyond just string checking (e.g., parsing, validation)
	+ Cons:
		- Typically slower than using `Array.includes`
		- Can lead to increased memory usage due to regex compilation

**Library/Language Features:**

In the provided benchmark test cases, we can see that:

* The `includes` method is used with an array (`isCeoLevel`)
* The `test` method is used with a regular expression pattern (`^(CEO_STAR|CEO_STAR_CREATOR)$`)

These methods are part of the JavaScript language itself and don't require any external libraries.

**Special JS Features/ Syntax:**

The benchmark uses the following special features/syntax:

* The `/regex-pattern/` syntax for creating regular expressions.
* The `test()` method for testing if a string matches a regex pattern.
* The `includes()` method for checking if an element exists in an array.

These are all standard JavaScript language features that don't require any external libraries or frameworks.

**Other alternatives:**

If you were to benchmark the performance of other approaches, some alternatives could be:

* Using a library like RegEx.js or regex-testing library for more complex regex patterns
* Implementing a custom search algorithm using a data structure like a Trie or a hash table
* Using a different programming language or framework that provides built-in support for array-based or regex-based string matching

However, these alternatives would likely require additional setup and infrastructure, and may not be directly comparable to the `Array.includes` and `Regex.test` methods in this specific benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Array.includes vs Regex.test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Array.includes vs Regex.test

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Array.includes

Regex.test

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):