Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
new RegExp test
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
declare vs new RegExp
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
const reg = new RegExp(/^[0-9]*$/);
Tests:
declare
reg.test(1)
new RegExp
(new RegExp(/^[0-9]*$/)).test(1)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
declare
new RegExp
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 JSON and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is a JSON object that contains metadata about the test case, such as its name and description. In this case: * `Name`: "new RegExp test" - This is the name of the benchmark. * `Description`: null - There is no description provided for this benchmark. * `Script Preparation Code`: "const reg = new RegExp(/^[0-9]*$/);" - This code is used to prepare the script before running the benchmark. In this case, it creates a new regular expression (`RegExp`) that matches any string starting with digits (`[0-9]*$`). * `Html Preparation Code`: null - There is no HTML preparation code provided. **Individual Test Cases** The test cases are an array of objects that define specific tests to be executed. In this case, there are two test cases: 1. `"Benchmark Definition": "reg.test(1)"`, `"Test Name": "declare"` * This test case calls the `test` method on the regular expression created earlier (`reg`) with the input `1`. 2. `"Benchmark Definition": "(new RegExp(/^[0-9]*$/)).test(1)"`, `"Test Name": "new RegExp"` * This test case creates a new regular expression using the same pattern as before, and then calls its `test` method with the input `1`. **What's being tested** These two test cases are testing the performance of creating a new regular expression (`RegExp`) versus calling the `test` method on an existing one. **Options compared** There are two approaches being compared: 1. **Creating a new RegExp**: The first test case creates a new regular expression and then calls its `test` method. 2. **Calling test() on an existing RegExp**: The second test case creates a new regular expression, stores it in a variable, and then calls the `test` method on that variable. **Pros and Cons of each approach** * Creating a new RegExp: + Pros: Avoids unnecessary overhead of creating a new object. + Cons: Creates an additional object, which might incur some overhead due to memory allocation and garbage collection. * Calling test() on an existing RegExp: + Pros: Reuses the existing object, avoiding unnecessary creation and potential overhead. + Cons: Might involve some additional overhead due to looking up the `test` method on the existing object. **Library (if applicable)** There is no explicit library mentioned in this benchmark. However, regular expressions are a built-in feature of JavaScript. **Special JS features or syntax** There are no special JS features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript features like variables, `new` keyword, and method calls. **Other alternatives** If you wanted to test the performance of creating a new RegExp versus calling other methods on an existing object, you could modify the benchmark definition to include additional test cases, such as: * Creating a new RegExp vs. using a function constructor * Creating a new RegExp vs. using a class syntax * Using `RegExp.prototype.test()` vs. `RegExp.prototype.exec()`
Related benchmarks:
RegExp constructor vs literal vs premade, constructing in function, inline the test
RegExp constructor vs literal vs premade, constructing in function, inline the test 2
new RegExp test 2
RegExp constructor vs literals, with variations
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?