Benchmark: String.match vs String.includes

Script Preparation code:

globalThis.matches = 0;

Tests:

String.match
const testStrFirst = 'hafoo'; matches += testStrFirst.match(/foo/g) ? 1 : 0; const testStrNotMatch = 'fohao'; matches += testStrNotMatch.match(/foo/g) ? 1 : 0;
String.includes
const testStrFirst = 'hafoo'; matches += testStrFirst.includes("foo") ? 1 : 0; const testStrNotMatch = 'fohao'; matches += testStrNotMatch.includes("foo") ? 1 : 0;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String.match
String.includes

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined by two test cases:

1. `String.match`
2. `String.includes`

These two methods are used to search for a substring within a string in JavaScript.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, we have two options being compared:

* `String.match()`
* `String.includes()`

Both methods are used to find the first occurrence of a substring within a string. However, they differ in their implementation and behavior:

* `String.match()` returns an array containing the matched result(s), or null if no match is found.
* `String.includes()` returns a boolean value indicating whether the specified value is present in the string.

**Pros and Cons**

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

* `String.match()`
	+ Pros:
		- More flexible, as it can be used to search for multiple substrings.
		- Can return an array of matches if multiple occurrences are found.
	+ Cons:
		- Returns null if no match is found, which may require additional checks.
		- May have performance implications due to the creation of an array.
* `String.includes()`
	+ Pros:
		- Simple and intuitive API.
		- No need to worry about handling multiple matches or returns.
	+ Cons:
		- Less flexible than `match()`, as it only searches for a single substring.
		- Returns false if the value is not found, which may require additional checks.

**Library and Special Features**

Neither of these methods uses any libraries. However, it's worth noting that `String.match()` was introduced in ECMAScript 1999 (ES5), while `String.includes()` was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). The latter method provides a more modern and expressive way to perform substring searches.

**Other Considerations**

In addition to the pros and cons of each method, it's also worth considering factors such as:

* Performance: Both methods have their own performance characteristics. `match()` may have better performance for larger strings due to its ability to return an array of matches.
* Readability: `includes()` is generally considered more readable and easier to understand than `match()`, especially for simple substring searches.

**Alternatives**

If you need a more advanced or specialized way to perform substring searches, you might consider using:

* `RegExp`: A powerful regular expression engine that provides more features and flexibility than the built-in `match()` and `includes()` methods.
* Third-party libraries: There are many third-party libraries available that provide additional functionality for string manipulation, such as search and replace operations.

I hope this explanation helps!

Related benchmarks:

String.match vs String.includes (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: String.match vs String.includes

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

String.match

String.includes

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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