Benchmark: trim() vs replace()

Script Preparation code:

var str = '    fsajdf asdfjosa fjoiawejf oawjfoei jaosdjfsdjfo sfjos 2324234 sdf safjao j o        sdlfks dflks l      ';

Tests:

trim()
str.trim();
replace()
str.replace(/^\s+|\s+$/g, '');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
trim()
replace()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 14 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 135 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
trim()	71178240.0 Ops/sec
replace()	4576663.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two string manipulation methods: `trim()` and `replace()`. The test cases are designed to measure which method is faster for removing whitespace from a specific input string.

**Options Compared**

There are only two options compared:

1. **`str.trim();`**: This uses the built-in `trim()` method, which removes leading and trailing whitespace characters (spaces, tabs, newlines, etc.) from a string.
2. **`str.replace(/^\\s+|\\s+$/g, '');`**: This uses the `replace()` method with regular expressions to remove all whitespace characters from the start (`^`) and end (`$`) of the string.

**Pros and Cons**

* **`trim()`**:
	+ Pros: Simple, efficient, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: May not remove certain types of whitespace (e.g., Unicode characters).
* **`replace()` with regular expressions**:
	+ Pros: More flexible and can handle various types of whitespace.
	+ Cons: Slower due to the overhead of compiling regular expressions.

**Library Usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, it's likely that the `String.prototype.trim()` method and the `String.prototype.replace()` method are being used with some underlying libraries or frameworks (e.g., browsers' JavaScript engines).

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None of the special JavaScript features or syntax are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

For string manipulation, other methods could be considered:

* Using `String.prototype.split()`, `Array.prototype.push()`, and `join()` to remove whitespace.
* Implementing custom whitespace removal logic using bitwise operations (e.g., shifting characters left or right).
* Using a library like jQuery for more advanced string manipulation.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as efficient or widely supported as the built-in methods being tested.

Related benchmarks:

trim() vs replace() (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: trim() vs replace()

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

trim()

replace()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):