Benchmark: mine vittu - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var url = "/project/123";
var runs = 100000;
var re = /project\/\d+/;
var str = "project/"

Tests:

regex
for(var i = 0; i < runs; i += 1){ re.test(url); }
includes
for(var i = 0; i < runs; i += 1){ url.includes(str); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
regex
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'd be happy to explain the benchmark and its results.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two microbenchmarks: `regex` and `includes`. The benchmarks are designed to test the performance of JavaScript's regular expression (regex) functionality, specifically the `.test()` method and the `includes()` method.

**Options being compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:

1. **Regex (.test())**: This approach uses a regular expression to search for a pattern in a string.
2. **String includes()**: This approach uses the `includes()` method to check if a substring is present in a larger string.

**Pros and Cons**

**Regex (.test())**

Pros:

* Can be used for more complex searches, such as validation or extraction of data from strings.
* Can be optimized for specific use cases (e.g., by using anchors or possessive quantifiers).

Cons:

* Can be slower due to the overhead of parsing and compiling regular expressions.
* May have a higher memory footprint due to the creation of regex objects.

**String includes()**

Pros:

* Typically faster than regex (.test()) since it doesn't require parsing and compiling regular expressions.
* Has lower memory requirements since it only creates a single string object.

Cons:

* Limited in its functionality compared to regex (.test()), which can perform more complex searches.
* May not be suitable for validation or extraction of data from strings, where regex might be more suitable.

**Library and purpose**

In the provided JSON, no specific library is explicitly mentioned. However, it's likely that the `re` object (regex) is using the built-in JavaScript `RegExp` object, which provides regular expression functionality.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

The benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's standard in modern JavaScript implementations. However, it's worth noting that some older browsers or environments might have limitations or differences in how regex and string methods are implemented.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to rewrite the benchmarks using other languages or libraries, here are a few options:

1. **Python**: You could write these benchmarks using Python's `re` module for regex testing and its built-in string comparison functions for includes-style testing.
2. **C++**: With C++, you would use the `std::regex` class for regex testing and simple string comparisons (e.g., `str.find()` or `str.indexOf()`) for includes-style testing.
3. **Other languages**: Depending on your programming language of choice, there might be alternative methods or libraries that provide similar functionality.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would likely change the nature of the benchmark significantly, and some aspects (like performance or syntax) might not be directly comparable to JavaScript's built-in features.

Related benchmarks:

mine vittu (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: regex vs includes

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

regex

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):