Benchmark: regexp vs func 2

Script Preparation code:

var min = 0;
var MAX_CID_VALUE = 268435455;
var cid = '268435454';
var result = null;

Tests:

regexp
result = /^[0-9]{1,9}$/.test(cid) && Number(cid) < MAX_CID_VALUE
func
const val = Number.parseInt(cid); result = isNaN(val) || val > MAX_CID_VALUE || val < 0;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
regexp
func

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to validate a CID (Customer ID) number:

1. **RegExp**: Using a regular expression (`/^[0-9]{1,9}$/`) to check if the CID is a valid integer within a specific range.
2. **Func**: Using a custom function to parse the CID and then validate it using three conditions: `isNaN(val)` (checking for NaN), `val > MAX_CID_VALUE`, and `val < 0`.

**RegExp Approach**

The RegExp approach uses a regular expression pattern to match the CID format. The pattern `/^[0-9]{1,9}$/` matches:

* `^`: Start of the string
* `[0-9]`: Matches any digit (0-9)
* `{1,9}`: Matches exactly 1 to 9 occurrences of the preceding element (digits)
* `$`: End of the string

The `test()` method returns a boolean value indicating whether the CID matches the pattern.

**Func Approach**

The Func approach uses two steps:

1. Parse the CID using `Number.parseInt(cid)`, which converts the string to an integer.
2. Validate the parsed CID using three conditions:
	* `isNaN(val)` checks if the parsed CID is NaN (not a number).
	* `val > MAX_CID_VALUE` checks if the parsed CID is greater than the maximum allowed value (`268435455`).
	* `val < 0` checks if the parsed CID is less than 0.

**Pros and Cons**

Both approaches have their pros and cons:

* **RegExp Approach**:
	+ Pros: Can be more concise and expressive, easier to read.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to regular expression parsing and matching.
* **Func Approach**:
	+ Pros: More explicit and understandable, can handle errors and edge cases explicitly.
	+ Cons: Longer code and more complex logic.

**Library Usage**

There is no library used in this benchmark. The RegExp pattern is a built-in JavaScript feature, and the Func approach uses only built-in functions (`Number.parseInt()` and `isNaN()`).

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to optimize the RegExp approach, consider using:

* Lookahead/lookbehind assertions to improve performance.
* Character class shortcuts (e.g., `[0-9a-fA-F]` for hexadecimal strings).

For the Func approach, consider optimizing the parsing and validation logic to reduce overhead.

Note that this benchmark is a simple example, and real-world scenarios may require more complex optimizations or different approaches.

Related benchmarks:

regexp vs func 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: regexp vs func

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

regexp

func

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):