Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
regex 0001
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
REGEX_1 vs REGEX_2
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var REGEX_1 = /"{0,1}cpf"{0,1}[:=]"{0,1}([\w\s]{1,})/; var REGEX_2 = /"{0,1}cpf"{0,1}[:=]\"{0,1}([\w\s]+)/;
Tests:
REGEX_1
REGEX_1.test("cpf=123")
REGEX_2
REGEX_2.test("cpf=123")
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
REGEX_1
REGEX_2
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
llama3.1:latest
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the explanation of what is being tested and compared on MeasureThat.net. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition represents two different regular expression (regex) patterns, `REGEX_1` and `REGEX_2`. The preparation code creates these regex patterns and stores them in variables `REGEX_1` and `REGEX_2`. ```javascript var REGEX_1 = /"{0,1}cpf"{0,1}[:=]"{0,1}([\w\s]{1,})"/; var REGEX_2 = /"{0,1}cpf"{0,1}[:=\]"{0,1}([\w\s]+)//; ``` **Test Cases** Two test cases are defined: `REGEX_1.test("cpf=123")` and `REGEX_2.test("cpf=123")`. These test cases execute the two regex patterns on a sample string `"cpf=123"`. **What is being tested?** In this benchmark, we're comparing the performance of two different regex patterns when executed on a sample string. The goal is to determine which pattern is faster in terms of executions per second (EPS). **Options compared:** * `REGEX_1`: This pattern uses a more verbose syntax with escaped quotes (`"`) and character classes (`\w` and `\s`). It also includes a capturing group (`([\\w\\s]{1,})`). * `REGEX_2`: This pattern uses a slightly different syntax with single quotes (`'`) instead of double quotes. It also omits the capturing group. **Pros and Cons:** * `REGEX_1`: More verbose syntax may make it easier to read and maintain for developers who are familiar with regex patterns. However, this verbosity can also lead to slower performance due to the extra overhead of parsing the more complex pattern. * `REGEX_2`: The simplified syntax may result in faster execution times since it's less computationally expensive to parse. However, this brevity comes at the cost of reduced readability for developers who are not familiar with regex patterns. **Library and Special JS Feature:** No libraries or special JavaScript features are used in this benchmark. **Alternatives:** If you're concerned about performance when using regular expressions, consider the following alternatives: 1. **String methods:** Instead of using regex patterns, use built-in string methods like `indexOf()` or `includes()`, which can be more efficient for simple string matching tasks. 2. **Regex optimization:** If you must use regex patterns, try optimizing them by minimizing unnecessary escapes and character classes. 3. **Pre-compilation:** Some libraries and frameworks allow pre-compiling regex patterns to improve performance. Overall, this benchmark provides insights into the performance differences between two distinct regex patterns. While the results may vary depending on your specific use case, they can help guide decisions when choosing between these alternatives.
Related benchmarks:
regex 0001 + 1
regex 0001 + 2
regex 0001 + 4
regex 0001 + 5
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?