Toggle navigation
MeasureThat
.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
Feature Requests
FAQ
Register
Log In
Custom replacement in string
(version: 0)
Benchmark.js
Comparing performance of:
replace regex vs replace All
Created:
2 years ago
by:
Guest
Go to the latest result
Tests:
replace regex
"this is it".replace(/i/g, "o");
replace All
"this is it".replaceAll("i", "o");
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
replace regex
replace All
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome Mobile 131 on Android
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
<iframe src="https://measurethat.net/Embed?id=570431" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>
replace regex
2.3M/s
replace All
2.2M/s
View exact numbers
Test name
Executions per second
✓
replace regex
2,297,647 Ops/sec
replace All
2,176,434 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and its components. **Benchmark Definition** The provided `Json` contains two benchmark definitions: 1. `"this is it"`.replace(/i/g, "o");` 2. `"this is it"`.replaceAll("i", "o"); Both benchmarks aim to measure the performance of string replacement operations in JavaScript. **String Replacement Options** Two options are compared: 1. `replace()` method: This method is a built-in method in JavaScript that replaces occurrences of a pattern with a specified replacement string. 2. `replaceAll()` method (not native): This method is not a standard JavaScript method, but rather a polyfill that mimics the behavior of `String.prototype.replaceAll()`. The `replaceAll()` method is not available in all browsers. **Pros and Cons** 1. **replace() method:** * Pros: + Widely supported across most browsers. + Simple and concise syntax. * Cons: + Can be slower than polyfills or custom implementations, especially for large strings. 2. **replaceAll() method (polyfill):** * Pros: + May perform better than `replace()` for certain use cases due to its implementation optimization. * Cons: + Not available in all browsers and may not behave exactly as intended. **Considerations** The choice of string replacement method can impact performance, especially when dealing with large strings or high execution counts. In this benchmark, the difference between `replace()` and `replaceAll()` is likely to be noticeable due to the use of a polyfill for the latter. **Library/Custom Feature** Neither benchmark uses any libraries, but it's worth noting that some browsers may have built-in support for `replaceAll()` or similar methods. **Special JS Features/Syntax** No special JavaScript features or syntax are mentioned in this benchmark. **Other Alternatives** In theory, other string replacement methods could be used, such as: 1. Using regular expression engines like V8 (in Chrome) or SpiderMonkey (in Firefox). 2. Implementing a custom string replacement algorithm. 3. Utilizing browser-specific APIs for string manipulation, if available. However, the `replace()` and `replaceAll()` methods are widely supported and likely to be the most efficient choices in this benchmark.
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?