Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
replace vs replaceAll Global
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
Comparing performance of:
replace vs replaceAll
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
replace
const test = 'test test test test'; const result = test.replace(/test/g, 'hello');
replaceAll
const test = 'test test test test'; const result = test.replaceAll('test', 'hello');
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
replace
replaceAll
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.0.0 YaBrowser/25.2.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Yandex Browser 25 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=598978" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
replace
2.3M/s
replaceAll
2.2M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
replace
2,301,135 Ops/sec
replaceAll
2,203,498 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
I'd be happy to explain what's tested in the provided benchmark. **Overview of the Benchmark** The benchmark measures the performance difference between two string replacement methods: `replace()` and `replaceAll()`. These methods are used to replace all occurrences of a pattern in a string with another value. **Options Compared** There are only two options being compared: 1. **`replace()`**: This method replaces the first occurrence of a pattern in a string with another value. 2. **`replaceAll()`**: This method replaces all occurrences of a pattern in a string with another value. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **`replace()`**: + Pros: Can be more efficient if only one replacement is needed, as it doesn't have to scan the entire string multiple times. + Cons: Fails if there are no matches, and returns `undefined` if the pattern is not found. Also, it's not designed for replacing all occurrences of a pattern. * **`replaceAll()`**: + Pros: Replaces all occurrences of a pattern in a string, making it more suitable for cases where multiple replacements are needed. + Cons: May be less efficient than `replace()`, especially if only one replacement is needed, as it has to scan the entire string multiple times. **Library Usage** There's no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark. However, it's worth noting that both `replace()` and `replaceAll()` methods are built-in methods of the JavaScript String prototype. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** None mentioned in this benchmark. It only uses standard JavaScript syntax. **Other Considerations** To ensure accurate results, it's essential to consider the following: * The input string size and complexity can impact performance. * The pattern being replaced can affect performance, especially if it's complex or contains many repetitions. * The replacement value should be carefully chosen to avoid unnecessary allocations or operations. **Alternatives** Some alternative approaches for replacing strings in JavaScript include: * Using a third-party library like [Sieve.js](https://github.com/mattias-lundberg/sieve), which provides more efficient string manipulation methods, including regular expressions. * Implementing custom replacement logic using loops and conditional statements. * Utilizing WebAssembly (WASM) or other just-in-time (JIT) compilation options to optimize performance. Keep in mind that the choice of alternative approach depends on the specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.
Related benchmarks
String.replace() vs String.replaceAll()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?