Benchmark: Performance of replace() vs slice() vs split

Script Preparation code:

var strIn = 'data:video/mp4;base64,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';
var strOut = '';
var regex = /^data:.*,/;

Tests:

replace inline regex
strOut = strIn.replace(/^data:.*,/, ''); return strOut;
replace compiled regex var
strOut = strIn.replace(regex, ''); return strOut;
indexOf slice+1
let pictureIndex = strIn.indexOf(","); let picture_slice = strIn.slice(pictureIndex + 1); strOut = picture_slice; return strOut;
indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace
let pictureIndex = strIn.indexOf(","); let picture_slice = strIn.slice(pictureIndex + 1); let picture = picture_slice.replace(/^data:.*,/, ""); strOut = picture; return strOut;
split index
let pictureIndex = strIn.split(","); let picture_slice = pictureIndex[1] strOut = picture_slice; return strOut;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
replace inline regex
replace compiled regex var
indexOf slice+1
indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace
split index

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/109.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 109 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

indexOf slice+1

2.6M/s

split index

2.4M/s

indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace

2.2M/s

replace inline regex

270K/s

replace compiled regex var

265K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ indexOf slice+1	2,572,478 Ops/sec
split index	2,412,399 Ops/sec
indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace	2,240,838 Ops/sec
replace inline regex	270,063 Ops/sec
replace compiled regex var	265,423 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll answer the questions based on the provided benchmark results.

It appears that there are six test cases with different approaches to processing the input string `strIn`. The goal is to determine which approach has the fastest execution time.

Here's a brief analysis of each test case:

1. **replace inline regex**: This method uses a regular expression to replace the `data:`,* substring at the beginning of the string.
2. **replace compiled regex var**: This method uses a variable `regex` to store the regular expression, and then replaces the `data:`,* substring using that variable.
3. **indexOf slice+1**: This method finds the index of the comma character (`\`,`) in the input string using `indexOf()`, and then slices the resulting string to exclude the first part.
4. **indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace**: Similar to the previous test case, but an additional regular expression replacement is performed unnecessarily.
5. **split index**: This method splits the input string into substrings at each comma character (`\`,`) using `split()`, and then takes the second substring.

Based on the benchmark results, it appears that:

* The inline regex approach (`replace inline regex`) has a relatively fast execution time of 270063.03125 executions per second.
* The compiled regex var approach (`replace compiled regex var`) also performs well with an execution time of 265422.75 seconds.
* The `indexOf slice+1` and `split index` approaches are slower, with times of 2412399.25 and 2240837.75 seconds, respectively.
* The `indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace` approach is the slowest, with a time of 270063.03125 seconds (the same as the inline regex approach).

Based on these results, it appears that the most efficient approaches are using regular expressions (either inline or compiled) to process the input string. However, there may be further optimizations possible, such as:

* Using a more optimized regular expression engine (e.g., `^` instead of `\d+`)
* Avoiding unnecessary string slicing or splitting
* Using caching or memoization to store intermediate results

To further improve performance, additional analysis and experimentation would be required to identify the most effective optimization strategy.

Performance of replace() vs slice() vs split (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Test the performance of replace() vs slice() vs split when replacing a string

Comparing performance of: `replace inline regex vs replace compiled regex var vs indexOf slice+1 vs indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace vs split index`

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

replace inline regex

replace compiled regex var

indexOf slice+1

indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace

split index

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Performance of replace() vs slice() vs split (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Test the performance of replace() vs slice() vs split when replacing a string

Comparing performance of: replace inline regex vs replace compiled regex var vs indexOf slice+1 vs indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace vs split index

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

replace inline regex

replace compiled regex var

indexOf slice+1

indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace

split index

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `replace inline regex vs replace compiled regex var vs indexOf slice+1 vs indexOf slice+1 and redundant replace vs split index`