Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
test regex vs loop
(version: 0)
test regex vs loop
Comparing performance of:
regex vs loop
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
regex
const regex = /(00|11|22|33|44|55|66|77|88|99)/; let num = 3298; num = num + 1; let aux = (num).toString(); while (regex.test(aux)) { num += 1; aux = num.toString(); }
loop
let num = 3298; const consecutiveChars = function(num) { const arr = num.toString().split(''); for (let idx = 0; idx < arr.length - 1; idx++) { if (arr[idx] == arr[idx + 1]) return true; } return false; } num = num + 1; while (consecutiveChars(num)) { num++; }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
regex
loop
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
5 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:148.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/148.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 148 on Ubuntu
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=625868" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
regex
475K/s
loop
247K/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
regex
474,709 Ops/sec
loop
247,431 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**Overview of the Benchmark** The provided benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: using a regular expression (`regex`) and a loop-based approach, in this case, a function that checks for consecutive characters in a string. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares two options: 1. **Regex Approach**: The first test case uses a regular expression to check if each character in the `aux` string is equal to the next one. 2. **Loop-Based Approach**: The second test case uses a loop-based approach, where a function checks if each pair of consecutive characters in the `aux` string are equal. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **Regex Approach**: + Pros: Simple and concise code, can be easily adapted to different use cases. + Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of regular expression compilation and execution. * **Loop-Based Approach**: + Pros: Can be more efficient for large inputs since it avoids the overhead of regular expression compilation and execution. Additionally, it's easier to optimize loop-based approaches for performance. + Cons: More complex code compared to the regex approach. **Library and Its Purpose** There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, the `test()` function used in the regex approach is a part of the built-in JavaScript String prototype, which provides a convenient way to perform string matching with regular expressions. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** The benchmark uses modern JavaScript features, such as: * **Arrow functions**: Used in the `consecutiveChars` function. * **Template literals**: Used to create the `aux` variable. * **Loops**: Used in both test cases. However, there are no special ES6+ features like classes, generators, or async/await used in this benchmark. **Other Alternatives** Some alternative approaches that could be tested in a similar benchmark include: 1. Using a custom loop instead of the built-in `for` loop. 2. Using a different data structure, such as an array, to store consecutive characters. 3. Using a more efficient algorithm for checking consecutive characters, such as using a single pass through the string. These alternatives would require modifications to the benchmark definition and test cases to accurately reflect their performance characteristics.
Related benchmarks
RegEx.exec vs regex.test
RegEx.test vs. String.match vs. String.search
Reuse Regex? RegEx.test vs. String.match vs. String.search
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?