Benchmark: ㄴㅈ4죠ㅗㅠㅇㄴㅇㄴㅎㅎ

Script Preparation code:

var string = "[12].Hello.world[2]";
var regex = /Hello/;

Tests:

RegEx.test
function getNestedProperty(key = "", object = {}) { return key .replace(/[\[\]\.]+/g, ' ') .trim() .split(' ') ?.reduce((acc, v) => acc?.[v], object); } getNestedProperty(string, {a: {b: 2}})
String.includes
function getNestedProperty(key = "", object = {}) { return key .match(/[ㄱ-힣a-zA-Z0-9]+/g) ?.reduce((acc, v) => acc?.[v], object); } getNestedProperty(string, {a: {b: 2}})

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
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.

I'll break down the provided JSON for you.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Script Preparation Code` section of the benchmark definition contains two lines of JavaScript code:

```javascript
var string = "[12].Hello.world[2]";
var regex = /Hello/;
```

* The first line creates a variable `string` with a specific value, which is `[12].Hello.world[2]`. This string will be used as input for the benchmark tests.
* The second line defines a regular expression (`regex`) that matches the word "Hello" in any case.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare two different approaches to extract a nested property from an object:

1. **RegEx.test**: Uses the `string.includes()` method with a regular expression to search for the substring "Hello" within the `string`.
2. **String.includes**: Directly calls the `includes()` method on the `string` variable, which will return a boolean indicating whether the string contains the specified value.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **RegEx.test**:
	+ Pros: Can be more efficient for searching complex patterns in strings.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the additional regular expression processing.
* **String.includes**:
	+ Pros: Typically faster and more lightweight, as it only performs a simple string search.
	+ Cons: May not work correctly for all cases, such as when the value is not a substring (e.g., "Hello world").

**Library**

The `getNestedProperty()` function is used in both test cases. This function takes two arguments: `key` and `object`. It uses various methods to extract the nested property from the object.

* The function first removes escape characters (`\\[\\]\\.`) and trims whitespace from the `key`.
* Then, it splits the `key` into an array of values.
* For each value in the array, it attempts to reduce the `object` using that value as a key. If successful, the resulting property is returned.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these benchmarks.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to extract nested properties from an object, you may consider alternative approaches:

1. **Array.prototype.reduce()**: Instead of using `reduce()` with a string as the accumulator, you can use it directly on the object.
2. **Object.keys() and bracket notation**: You can use `Object.keys()` to get an array of property names in the object and then access them using bracket notation (`object[key]`).
3. **For...in loop**: Another approach is to use a traditional `for...in` loop to iterate over the object's properties.

Here's an example implementation using `reduce()`:
```javascript
function getNestedProperty(key, object) {
  return Object.keys(object).reduce((acc, v) => acc && acc[v], object);
}
```
And here's an example implementation using bracket notation:
```javascript
function getNestedProperty(key, object) {
  const values = key.split(' ');
  return values.reduce((acc, v) => acc && acc[v], object);
}
```

Related benchmarks:

ㄴㅈ4죠ㅗㅠㅇㄴㅇㄴㅎㅎ (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs String.includes

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

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):