Benchmark: RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs String == vs String ===

Script Preparation code:

var string = "Hello world!";
var regex = /Hello/;

Tests:

RegEx.test
regex.test(string);
String.includes
string.includes("Hello");
String.match
string.match("Hello");
String ==
string == "Hello"
String ===
string === "Hello"

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
String.includes
String.match
String ==
String ===

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RegEx.test	10623211.0 Ops/sec
String.includes	27412368.0 Ops/sec
String.match	6538330.5 Ops/sec
String ==	27464360.0 Ops/sec
String ===	27464430.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark tests five different approaches to check if a string contains or matches a specific pattern:

1. `RegEx.test(string)`: Uses the `test()` method of a regular expression object to test if the entire string matches the regular expression.
2. `string.includes("Hello")`: Uses the `includes()` method to check if the string includes the specified substring.
3. `string.match("Hello")`: Uses the `match()` method to find the first occurrence of the specified pattern in the string.
4. `string == "Hello"`: Uses the loose equality operator (`==`) to compare the string with the literal value.
5. `string === "Hello"`: Uses the strict equality operator (`===`) to compare the string with the literal value.

**Options being compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of each approach across different browsers and devices:

* `RegEx.test(string)`: Tests the efficiency of using regular expressions for pattern matching.
* `string.includes("Hello")`: Tests the efficiency of using the `includes()` method to check if a string contains a substring.
* `string.match("Hello")`: Tests the efficiency of using the `match()` method to find occurrences of a pattern in a string.
* `string == "Hello"`: Tests the efficiency of using loose equality for string comparison.
* `string === "Hello"`: Tests the efficiency of using strict equality for string comparison.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. `RegEx.test(string)`: Pros:
	* Provides exact matches, not substring searches.
	* Can be faster for some patterns.
Cons:
	* Can be slower than other methods for simple pattern matching.
	* May be overkill for simple string comparisons.
2. `string.includes("Hello")`:
	* Pros:
		+ Fast and efficient for substring searches.
		+ Simple to use.
	Cons:
		+ Returns true for substrings, not exact matches.
		+ Can be slower than other methods for large strings.
3. `string.match("Hello")`:
	* Pros:
		+ Provides exact matches, similar to `RegEx.test()`.
		+ Can be faster for some patterns.
Cons:
		+ Returns an array of matches, not just the first occurrence.
		+ May be slower than other methods for very large strings.
4. `string == "Hello"`:
	* Pros:
		+ Simple to use and understand.
		+ Works well for simple string comparisons.
Cons:
	* Can lead to unexpected results due to loose equality (e.g., comparing a number with a string).
	* May be slower than other methods for large strings.
5. `string === "Hello"`:
	* Pros:
		+ Provides exact matches, similar to strict comparison operators.
		+ Works well for simple string comparisons.
Cons:
		+ Can lead to unexpected results due to strict equality (e.g., comparing a number with a string).
		+ May be slower than other methods for large strings.

**Library and purpose**

There is no specific library mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, some of these methods are built-in JavaScript functions or operators:

* `RegEx.test(string)`: Uses the RegExp object's `test()` method.
* `string.includes("Hello")`, `string.match("Hello")`: Use the `includes()`, `match()` methods of strings.
* `string == "Hello"`: Uses the loose equality operator (`==`).
* `string === "Hello"`: Uses the strict equality operator (`===`).

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you need to perform string matching or comparisons, here are some alternative approaches:

1. **Using a library**: Consider using a dedicated library like `lodash.string` (for string manipulation and comparison) or `regex-optimize` (for regular expression optimization).
2. **Native Web Workers**: If performance is critical, consider using native Web Workers to run the benchmarking code in parallel.
3. **Other JavaScript engines**: Compare the performance of different JavaScript engines, like SpiderMonkey (Firefox), V8 (Chrome), or GraalVM.
4. **Alternative comparison methods**: Consider using other comparison methods, such as `===` for exact matches or a custom function to compare strings.

Keep in mind that this benchmark is specific to measuring the performance of string matching and comparison methods in JavaScript. The results may not be directly applicable to your use case, but they can provide valuable insights into the performance characteristics of these methods.

Related benchmarks:

RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs String == vs String === (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs String.includes vs String.match vs String == vs String ===

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

String.match

String ==

String ===

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):