Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lastIndexOf vs indexOf (lastIndexOf benefit)
(version: 0)
lastIndexOf benefit
Comparing performance of:
lastIndexOf vs IndexOf
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Tests:
lastIndexOf
var str = "Hello world, welcome to the universe."; var n = str.lastIndexOf("erse");
IndexOf
var str = "Hello world, welcome to the universe."; var n = str.indexOf("erse");
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lastIndexOf
IndexOf
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 the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The test is designed to compare two JavaScript methods: `indexOf` and `lastIndexOf`. These two functions are used to find the index of a substring within a string. The main difference between them is how they handle the search for the substring: * `indexOf`: Returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value, or -1 if it's not found. * `lastIndexOf`: Returns the index of the last occurrence of the specified value, or -1 if it's not found. **Options Compared** The test is comparing two approaches to find the desired string: 1. **`indexOf`**: This method uses a linear search algorithm, which means it checks each character in the string one by one until it finds the specified substring. 2. **`lastIndexOf`**: This method also uses a linear search algorithm, but with a twist: it starts from the end of the string and moves backwards to find the last occurrence of the specified substring. **Pros and Cons** * **Linear Search Algorithm**: Both `indexOf` and `lastIndexOf` use a linear search algorithm, which means they have a time complexity of O(n), where n is the length of the string. This can be inefficient for large strings. * **Last Occurrence**: `lastIndexOf` provides an advantage when searching for substrings that may appear multiple times in the string, as it only needs to check the last occurrence. However, there's a trade-off: since both methods use a linear search algorithm, they may not perform well on very large strings. Additionally, if you're looking for the first occurrence of the substring, `indexOf` is generally faster. **Library and Special JS Feature** There are no libraries used in this benchmark, but it does utilize JavaScript's built-in `String.prototype.indexOf()` and `String.prototype.lastIndexOf()` methods. **Special JS Features** None mentioned explicitly. However, it's worth noting that JavaScript's `String.prototype.indexOf()` and `String.prototype.lastIndexOf()` methods use a technique called " Boyer-Moore" for performance optimization, which is not shown in the provided code. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative ways to find the index of a substring in a string, you could consider using: * Regular expressions (e.g., `str.match(/erse/)[0]`) * Using a library like Lodash's `indexOf` or `lastIndexOf` functions * Implementing a custom search algorithm using bitwise operations or other optimized techniques Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and trade-offs, depending on the specific use case.
Related benchmarks:
index vs lastindexof startsWith
index vs lastindexof empty
index vs lastindexof empty with startIndex set to 0
index vs lastindexofasdf
index vs lastindexof (for right biased values)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?