Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Regex -._
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
comma seperator vs pipe seperator
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
window.words = ['test-weird-name', 'another_weird-name', 'another_weird___-name...'];
Tests:
comma seperator
words.forEach((word) => { word.replace(/([\.,_,-])/g, "red"); })
pipe seperator
words.forEach((word) => { word.replace(/\_|\-\|./g, "red"); })
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
comma seperator
pipe seperator
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):
Let's break down what's being tested in this JavaScript benchmark. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON represents the benchmark definition, which includes: * **Script Preparation Code**: This code sets up an array `words` with specific values, including strings that contain various special characters (e.g., `_`, `-`, `.`, `,`, etc.). These strings are used to test different cases of character replacement. * **Html Preparation Code**: This field is empty, which means no HTML-related setup or preparation is required for the benchmark. **Individual Test Cases** There are two individual test cases: 1. **Comma Seperator** * The `Benchmark Definition` script uses `String.prototype.replace()` to replace commas with a new string. However, it's essential to note that this replacement only affects strings within the array `words`. * This test case is likely checking how efficiently different browsers can execute this specific replacement operation. 2. **Pipe Seperator** * Similar to the previous test case, this script uses `String.prototype.replace()` to replace pipes (`|`) with a new string. **Options Being Compared** In this benchmark, the options being compared are: * Browser: The test is comparing how different versions of Google Chrome (specifically Chrome 106) perform in terms of execution speed. * Device Platform: The test is comparing performance on Desktop platforms versus unknown platforms (implying mobile or other types of devices). * Operating System: The test is comparing performance across Windows 7 operating systems. **Pros and Cons of Different Approaches** 1. **Browser-Specific Optimizations**: By testing different Chrome versions, the benchmark can help identify potential optimization opportunities for specific browsers. 2. **Device Platform and OS Considerations**: Testing on Desktop platforms helps ensure that the results are representative of typical use cases. However, excluding mobile and other platforms might limit the applicability of the results. 3. **String Replacement Operations**: The benchmark focuses on a specific replacement operation (replacing special characters) to isolate performance differences. **Library Usage** None mentioned in the provided information. **Special JS Feature or Syntax** No specific features or syntax are being tested; however, the use of `String.prototype.replace()` and regular expressions is typical JavaScript programming practice. **Alternatives** Some alternatives for creating similar benchmarks include: * Using Node.js instead of Chrome for running tests * Adding more test cases to cover other string manipulation operations (e.g., concatenation, substring extraction) * Including other browser versions or browsers not covered in the current benchmark (e.g., Firefox, Edge) By analyzing this benchmark, we can gain insights into how different browsers handle specific string replacement operations, which might be useful for optimizing performance-critical code.
Related benchmarks:
Test regex
Test rgecg
regecx
regecxt
regecxgth
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?