Benchmark: RegEx.test vs Array.includes 2

Script Preparation code:

var type = "TYPE1";
var regex = /^TYPE[1-5]$/i;
var arr = ["TYPE1", "TYPE2", "TYPE3", "TYPE4", "TYPE5"];

Tests:

RegEx.test
regex.test(type);
Array.includes
arr.includes(type);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
Array.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 benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The JSON provides two benchmark definitions, which are:

1. `regex.test(type);`
2. `arr.includes(type);`

These two lines of code are used to measure the performance difference between using a regular expression (`regex.test`) and an array method (`Array.includes`).

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

* **Regex.test**: This is a built-in JavaScript function that tests if a string matches a given regular expression pattern. In this case, the regular expression `/^TYPE[1-5]$/i` matches any string that starts with "TYPE" followed by a digit between 1 and 5 (inclusive) in a case-insensitive manner.
* **Array.includes**: This is an array method that checks if a specific value exists in an array.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Regex.test**:
	+ Pros: Can be used to match more complex patterns, including strings with multiple conditions.
	+ Cons: Can be slower than Array.includes for simple string matching tasks due to the overhead of compiling regular expressions.
* **Array.includes**:
	+ Pros: Generally faster and more efficient than Regex.test for simple string matching tasks.
	+ Cons: Limited to checking if a value exists in an array; not suitable for more complex pattern matching.

**Library Usage**

The `regex` variable uses the built-in JavaScript regex library, which is part of the ECMAScript standard. The `Array.includes` method also relies on the built-in JavaScript array methods, which are also part of the ECMAScript standard.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax used in this benchmark. Both Regex.test and Array.includes use standard JavaScript functionality.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other alternatives to compare performance might include:

* Using a dedicated regular expression engine like PCRE (Perl-Compatible Regular Expressions) or Boost.Regex.
* Using a different string matching algorithm, such as the Boyer-Moore or Knuth-Morris-Pratt algorithms.
* Using a different array data structure, such as a linked list or a trie.

However, for simple cases like this one, built-in JavaScript functions are likely to be sufficient and efficient enough.

Related benchmarks:

RegEx.test vs Array.includes 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs Array.includes

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

Array.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):