Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
string.replace with regex: presaved const vs inline
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
presaved vs inline
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
window.data = 'Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Hic quaerat aspernatur sed sequi vero facere earum, illum vel veritatis ipsum, ratione ut sapiente facilis. Et molestias, dolore alias dolorem aut mollitia sed asperiores tempora ad ex nobis maiores amet quia dolores est vitae unde similique nisi. Minus quia corrupti incidunt cum veritatis adipisci! Rerum magnam voluptate expedita ducimus quas repellat unde asperiores possimus sunt, ut odit saepe adipisci, nam, ipsam sint debitis deleniti! In modi explicabo debitis nihil rem qui beatae impedit aliquid saepe. Quia tenetur nisi repellendus laborum! Natus explicabo nisi saepe autem recusandae eaque reiciendis ea dolor doloribus.'.split(' ');
Tests:
presaved
const rx = /(asperiores)/ig; window.data.map(i => i.replace(rx, 'REPLACED($1)'));
inline
window.data.map(i => i.replace(/(asperiores)/ig, 'REPLACED($1)'));
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
presaved
inline
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark is comparing two approaches to using regular expressions (regex) in JavaScript: 1. **Presaved regex**: Defining a regex pattern as a constant variable (`rx`) outside the `map` function. 2. **Inline regex**: Defining the regex pattern directly within the `replace` callback function. **Library and Syntax** In this benchmark, no external libraries are used beyond the standard JavaScript `String.prototype.replace()` method. However, one special syntax is used: `$1`. This is a reference to the first capture group in the regex pattern. In other words, when the regex pattern matches, the text matched by the entire pattern (including all groups) is replaced with the text from the first capture group followed by `$1`. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares two options: 1. **Presaved regex**: Defining the regex pattern as a constant variable (`rx`) outside the `map` function. This approach has several benefits: * Easier maintenance and modification of the regex pattern. * Can be cached or memoized if needed, reducing computation overhead. * More readable code, especially for complex regex patterns. 2. **Inline regex**: Defining the regex pattern directly within the `replace` callback function. This approach has some drawbacks: * Less maintainable and modifiable, as the regex pattern is tightly coupled with the surrounding code. * May lead to performance issues due to repeated compilation of the regex pattern. **Pros and Cons** Here's a summary of the pros and cons of each approach: Presaved regex: Pros: * Easier maintenance and modification * Can be cached or memoized for performance benefits Cons: None mentioned in this benchmark, but potential drawbacks might include: + Additional memory usage due to the constant variable. Inline regex: Pros: None significant enough to outweigh potential drawbacks. Cons: * Less maintainable and modifiable * May lead to performance issues due to repeated compilation of the regex pattern. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative approaches, consider: 1. **Using a regex library**: Instead of defining your own regex patterns, consider using an existing library like `regex-js` or `regex-optimize`. 2. **Caching and memoization**: Implement caching mechanisms to store compiled regex patterns and reuse them when possible. 3. **Precompiling regex patterns**: If you have complex regex patterns that don't change often, consider precompiling them at build time to reduce runtime overhead. Keep in mind that these alternatives might not address the specific trade-offs presented in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
regex .replace() vs literal .replaceAll()
replaceAll vs regex replace v2
String.replace(RegEx) vs String.replaceAll(String)
replaceAll vs regex replace pt3
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?