Benchmark: Regexp vs split cookie

Script Preparation code:

var cookie = 'intercom-id-mrtzdw2q=c2be8491-1730-4343-b16e-1c708643318e; token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJFUzI1NiIsImtpZCI6IjhjMTgyMTY1YWNmN2U3Yjg3NzkwNzcxNWFmZWRiNzhmIn0.e30.McvbBVzvGzsawYch7ToCgtCrUicIQZ3_wNBV93fVBMm90JTldSpzdDgXd0eY7au1AxQst08mH-7FVy4C8wr4EQ; intercom-session=acj; intercom-session-mq='

Tests:

Regexp
const TOKEN_REGEXP = /token=(\S+)/ const [, token] = TOKEN_REGEXP.exec(cookie) console.log(token)
Split
const token = cookie?.split('token=')[1] ? cookie.split('token=')[1].split(';')[0] : undefined console.log(token)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Regexp
Split

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one month ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/139.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 139 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Regexp	70146.9 Ops/sec
Split	73320.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The test on MeasureThat.net is designed to compare the performance of two approaches for extracting a token from a cookie string in JavaScript: using regular expressions (Regexp) versus splitting the string.

**Options compared:**

1. **Regular Expressions (Regexp):**
	* Using a RegExp object with a pattern to match the token.
	* Extracting the matched token using `exec()` and destructuring it into an array (`const [, token] = TOKEN_REGEXP.exec(cookie)`).
2. **Split method:**
	* Slicing the cookie string at the 'token=' substring using `[1]`.
	* Extracting the token from the resulting slice using another slicing operation (`split(';')[0]`).

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

**Regexp:**

Pros:

* Can be more flexible for complex pattern matching.
* Might be faster due to the optimized implementation in JavaScript engines.

Cons:

* Can be slower if the pattern is complex or the string is very large, as it may trigger additional checks.
* May require more code and setup for error handling.

**Split method:**

Pros:

* Often faster and more efficient, as slicing operations are implemented in native code.
* Easier to read and write, with less complexity.

Cons:

* May be limited by the specific split string used ('token=').
* Can lead to errors if the token is not correctly separated from other data.

**Other considerations:**

* The `cookie` string contains additional data (e.g., intercom-session and intercom-session-mq) that may affect performance. The benchmark assumes that these parts are not relevant for extracting the token.
* The `Token_REGEXP` pattern in Regexp test uses a raw string literal (`/token=(\\S+)/`) to avoid issues with backslashes and escape sequences.

**Library usage:**

None of the code snippets use any external libraries or frameworks beyond JavaScript's built-in functionality.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

The Regexp test uses an arrow function syntax (e.g., `const [, token] = TOKEN_REGEXP.exec(cookie)`) to simplify the execution. This is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

Related benchmarks:

Regexp vs split cookie (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Regexp vs Split

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Regexp

Split

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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