Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Joined RegExp vs looping
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Joined regexp vs loop vs single replace
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
Joined regexp
const toReplace = ['a', 'b', 'c']; const regexp = new RegExp(toReplace.join("|"), "g"); "abcdefgabcdefgabcdefg".replace(regexp, '*');
loop
const toReplace = ['a', 'b', 'c']; const sample = "abcdefgabcdefgabcdefg" toReplace.forEach((letter) => { sample.replace(new RegExp(letter, "g"), "*") })
single replace
const regexp = new RegExp("a", "g"); "aaadefgaaadefgaaadefg".replace(regexp, '*');
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Joined regexp
loop
single replace
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 its test cases. **What is being tested?** The benchmark measures the performance of different approaches for replacing characters in a string using regular expressions (REGEX). Specifically, it compares three methods: 1. Joined REGEX: Using a single REGEX pattern with joined character classes (`'a|b|c'`) to replace all occurrences of 'a', 'b', or 'c'. 2. Looping: Iterating over an array of characters and using `replace()` method on each iteration. 3. Single Replace: Using a single REGEX pattern with a specific character class (`'a'`) to replace only 'a' occurrences. **Options compared** The benchmark compares the performance of these three approaches: * Joined REGEX: This approach is more efficient because it uses a single REGEX pattern and reduces the number of regex engine calls. * Looping: This approach is less efficient because it uses multiple `replace()` method calls, which can be slower than using a single regex engine call. * Single Replace: This approach is similar to Joined REGEX but with only one character class. **Pros and Cons** * Joined REGEX: + Pros: More efficient, reduces the number of regex engine calls. + Cons: Can be less readable and maintainable if the character classes are complex or large. * Looping: + Pros: Can be more readable and maintainable for small arrays of characters. + Cons: Less efficient due to multiple `replace()` method calls. * Single Replace: + Pros: Similar to Joined REGEX but with only one character class, can be easier to read and maintain. + Cons: May not be as efficient as Joined REGEX. **Libraries used** None of the test cases explicitly use a library. However, the `RegExp` constructor is used in each test case, which is a built-in JavaScript function for creating regular expressions. **Special JS feature/syntax** The test cases do not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's typically available in most JavaScript engines. They only rely on basic language constructs like functions, loops, and object methods. **Other alternatives** If you're looking to optimize string replacement performance, you may also consider using: * `String.prototype.replaceAll()` method: This is a newer method in ECMAScript 2019+ that provides a more efficient way to replace all occurrences of a substring. * Using `String.prototype.replace()` with a callback function: Instead of using a regular expression pattern, you can use an anonymous function as the second argument to `replace()`, which allows for more flexible replacement logic. Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and trade-offs compared to the approaches tested in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
Regexp creation vs memoization
Regex vs split/join on simple case
Regex vs split/join 2
Regex vs split/join checking
Regex vs split/join 23313
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?