Benchmark: String.replace() vs String.replaceAll()

Tests:

String.replace()
'alguma coisa espaçada'.replace(/ /g, '-')
String.replaceAll()
'alguma coisa espaçada'.replaceAll(' ', '-')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String.replace()
String.replaceAll()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:142.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/142.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 142 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
String.replace()	19196230.0 Ops/sec
String.replaceAll()	33867504.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two JavaScript methods for replacing spaces in a string: `replace()` and `replaceAll()` (note that this is a TypeScript method, not JavaScript).

**Options Compared**

Two approaches are compared:

1. `String.replace()`: This method uses a regular expression to replace all occurrences of a pattern in a string. In this case, the pattern is a space (`/ /g`).
2. `String.replaceAll()`: This method also uses a regular expression to replace all occurrences of a pattern in a string. However, it's worth noting that `replaceAll()` is not a standard JavaScript method; it's more commonly used in other programming languages like Java or C#. In TypeScript, the equivalent method is `replace()`.

**Pros and Cons**

1. `String.replace()`: Pros:
	* Widely supported in browsers and Node.js.
	* Can be more efficient for simple replacements.
Cons:
	* May not work as expected with Unicode characters that have multiple forms (e.g., accented letters).
2. `String.replaceAll()` (TypeScript): Pros:
	* More explicit and readable syntax.
	* Supports Unicode characters out of the box.
Cons:
	* Less widely supported in older browsers and Node.js versions.

**Library and Purpose**

There is no library explicitly mentioned in the JSON, but it's worth noting that both `String.replace()` and `String.replaceAll()` rely on the browser's or engine's implementation of regular expressions. If you're interested in using a dedicated regex library, you can explore options like `jsregex` or `regexpr`.

**Special JS Feature**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax mentioned in the JSON.

**Other Considerations**

When writing benchmarks, it's essential to consider factors like:

* Input size and distribution: How does the input string vary between tests? Are there edge cases that might affect performance?
* Optimization techniques: Can you apply any optimizations, such as memoization or caching, to reduce the overhead of repeated calls to `replace()` or `replaceAll()`?
* Browser and Node.js version dependencies: Which versions are most relevant for your target audience?

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, consider:

* Using a library like `jsregex` or `regexpr` to implement regular expressions.
* Implementing the replacement logic yourself using bitwise operations or other techniques.
* Using a different string manipulation method, such as `String.prototype.split()` and `join()`.
* Measuring performance with different input sizes or distributions.

Related benchmarks:

String.replace() vs String.replaceAll() (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: String.replace() vs String.replaceAll()

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

String.replace()

String.replaceAll()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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