Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
new RegExp test 2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
declare vs new RegExp
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var 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):
I'll break down the provided JSON for MeasureThat.net and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition is a JSON object that represents the test case: ```json { "Name": "new RegExp test 2", "Description": null, "Script Preparation Code": "var reg = new RegExp(/^[0-9]*$/);", "Html Preparation Code": null } ``` This definition is for a benchmark that tests two approaches to create a regular expression: 1. `reg.test(1)`: This line tests the `test()` method of an object created with `new RegExp()`. 2. `(new RegExp(/^[0-9]*$/)).test(1)`: This line creates a new regular expression object and calls its `test()` method. **Options Compared** The two options being compared are: * **`reg.test(1)`**: This approach uses the `test()` method of an object created with `new RegExp()`. The object is created with a string pattern (`/^[0-9]*$/`) that matches any digit at the start of a string. * **`(new RegExp(/^[0-9]*$/)).test(1)`**: This approach creates a new regular expression object and calls its `test()` method. It's equivalent to the first approach but uses syntax sugar. **Pros and Cons** * **`reg.test(1)`**: + Pros: More concise, readable, and idiomatic JavaScript. + Cons: May be slightly slower due to the overhead of object creation and method call. * **`(new RegExp(/^[0-9]*$/)).test(1)`**: + Pros: Can be faster for some JavaScript engines that optimize `RegExp` object construction and methods. + Cons: Less readable, less idiomatic, and may require more parentheses. **Library** There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it uses the `RegExp` class, which is a built-in JavaScript class for working with regular expressions. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard `RegExp` class and its methods. **Other Alternatives** If you were to reimplement this benchmark, consider using: * **`String.prototype.test()`**: This method is available on strings and can be used with a regular expression as a string. * **`regex` module**: A third-party module for working with regular expressions in JavaScript. However, since the benchmark uses built-in `RegExp`, it's not necessary to use an external library. Keep in mind that the performance differences between these approaches may vary depending on the JavaScript engine and version being used.
Related benchmarks:
regex speed test
regex speed test-2
new RegExp test
Regex tests Dani
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?