Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
regex 0001 + 5
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
REGEX_1 vs REGEX_2 vs REGEX_3 vs REGEX_4
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]+)/; var REGEX_3 = /"{0,1}cpf"{0,1}[:=]"{0,1}([^ ,]*)/; var REGEX_4 = /"{0,1}cpf"{0,1}[:=]"{0,1}([\w\s]{1,}),?/;
Tests:
REGEX_1
REGEX_1.test("cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12")
REGEX_2
REGEX_2.test("cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12")
REGEX_3
REGEX_3.test("cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12")
REGEX_4
REGEX_4.test("cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12,cpf=12")
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
REGEX_1
REGEX_2
REGEX_3
REGEX_4
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 definition and test cases to understand what is being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that tests regular expression (regex) matching performance. The script preparation code defines four different regex patterns: 1. `REGEX_1`: Matches CPF (Brazilian Personal Identity Number) data with optional quotes and whitespace. 2. `REGEX_2`: Similar to `REGEX_1`, but without the `=` sign after the pattern. 3. `REGEX_3`: A simplified version of `REGEX_1` that removes unnecessary characters (`[:=]`) and uses a capture group for the CPF data. 4. `REGEX_4`: An even simpler version of `REGEX_1` that adds a non-capturing group (`(?:`) around the CPF data. **Test Cases** The benchmark definition is used to create four individual test cases, each testing one of the regex patterns defined above. The test cases are: 1. `REGEX_1` 2. `REGEX_2` 3. `REGEX_3` 4. `REGEX_4` These test cases are likely used to compare the performance of different browsers and devices in executing these regex patterns. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares the execution speed of four different regex patterns: 1. **`REGEX_1`**: Matches CPF data with optional quotes and whitespace. 2. **`REGEX_2`**: Similar to `REGEX_1`, but without the `=` sign after the pattern. 3. **`REGEX_3`**: A simplified version of `REGEX_1` that removes unnecessary characters and uses a capture group for the CPF data. 4. **`REGEX_4`**: An even simpler version of `REGEX_1` that adds a non-capturing group around the CPF data. These options are compared in terms of execution speed, which is likely measured by the number of executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond). **Pros and Cons** The pros and cons of each approach are: 1. **`REGEX_1`**: Pros: Easy to understand and write; Cons: Less efficient due to unnecessary characters. 2. **`REGEX_2`**: Pros: Simpler than `REGEX_1`, but may not match all CPF data formats; Cons: May lead to false positives or false negatives. 3. **`REGEX_3`**: Pros: More efficient and accurate than `REGEX_1` and `REGEX_2`; Cons: Requires a good understanding of regex syntax. 4. **`REGEX_4`**: Pros: Even more simplified than `REGEX_3`, but may not be as accurate; Cons: May lead to false positives or false negatives. **Library** None of the provided test cases use any external libraries, but it's worth noting that some regex patterns might require additional libraries for accurate execution (e.g., UTF-8 support). **Special JS Feature/Syntax** The benchmark does not appear to use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond basic regex pattern matching. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for testing regex performance could include: 1. **RegexBench**: A dedicated regex benchmarking tool. 2. **JSRegexp**: A JavaScript library for working with regular expressions, which could be used in a benchmarking scenario. 3. **Benchmarking frameworks**: Such as Benchmark.js or Microbenchmark, which provide a more comprehensive approach to benchmarking performance. Keep in mind that the specific alternatives would depend on the requirements and goals of the benchmarking effort.
Related benchmarks:
regex 0001
regex 0001 + 1
regex 0001 + 2
regex 0001 + 4
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?