Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
RegEx.exec vs String.match (inline)
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
regex.exec vs string.match
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var string = "Hello world!";
Tests:
regex.exec
/[A-Z][a-z]+ [a-z]+/.exec(string);
string.match
string.match(/[A-Z][a-z]+ [a-z]+/);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
regex.exec
string.match
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
5 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:147.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/147.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 147 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=625017" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
regex.exec
23.0M/s
string.match
20.5M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
regex.exec
22,971,846 Ops/sec
string.match
20,455,780 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark compares two approaches for searching a regular expression (RegEx) pattern within a string: 1. `string.match()` with an inline RegEx pattern 2. `RegExp.exec()` with an inline RegEx pattern Both methods are used to find the first match of a specific pattern in a given string. **Options Compared** The two approaches being compared are: 1. **`string.match()`**: This method returns an array containing all matches or `null` if no match is found. It's more concise and readable, but can be slower due to its non-capturing nature. 2. **`RegExp.exec()`**: This method returns the first match of a pattern in a string or `null` if no match is found. It's more flexible and powerful, but requires creating an instance of the RegEx object. **Pros and Cons** * **`string.match()`**: + Pros: More concise and readable, works well for simple patterns. + Cons: Can be slower due to its non-capturing nature, may not work with complex patterns. * **`RegExp.exec()`**: + Pros: More flexible and powerful, can handle complex patterns and is more suitable for most use cases. + Cons: Requires creating an instance of the RegEx object, which can add overhead. **Other Considerations** When choosing between `string.match()` and `RegExp.exec()`, consider the following: * If you only need to find a single match, `RegExp.exec()` might be overkill. However, if you need to handle complex patterns or iterate over multiple matches, it's usually the better choice. * Keep in mind that both methods can return `null` if no match is found. **Library and Special JS Features** In this benchmark, there are no libraries used explicitly. However, `RegExp.exec()` uses a built-in JavaScript feature: regular expressions (RegEx). RegEx patterns are a way to describe search criteria using a concise syntax that allows for complex matching and capturing. No special JavaScript features or syntax are being tested in this specific benchmark. **Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative approaches, consider: 1. **`String.prototype.replace()`**: While not designed for searching, `replace()` can be used with a RegEx pattern to find and replace occurrences of a match. 2. **`Array.prototype.find()`**: This method can be used to find the first element in an array that satisfies a condition, which might be useful if you're working with arrays of strings. Keep in mind that these alternatives may not offer the same level of control or performance as `RegExp.exec()`.
Related benchmarks
RegEx.exec vs String.match
RegEx.exec vs regex.test
RegEx.test (with inline regex) vs. String.includes vs. String.match
RegEx.test vs. Inline RegEx.test
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?