Benchmark: replace vs replaceAll (native)

Tests:

replace
"this is it".replace(/ /g, "+");
replaceAll (regex)
"this is it".replaceAll(/ /g, "+");
replaceAll (string)
"this is it".replaceAll(" ", "+");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
replace
replaceAll (regex)
replaceAll (string)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 19 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/109.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 109 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
replace	6846933.0 Ops/sec
replaceAll (regex)	5177067.0 Ops/sec
replaceAll (string)	5352797.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help you understand the benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents three JavaScript microbenchmarks that test different approaches for replacing a space character (`" "`).

**Options compared:**

1. `replace()`: This method uses a regular expression to replace all occurrences of whitespace characters with a specified string.
2. `replaceAll(string)`: This method is not a standard JavaScript method, but rather an alias or wrapper around the `replace()` method. It's used to replace a specific character (in this case, a space) in a string.
3. `replaceAll(regex)`: This method uses a regular expression to replace all occurrences of whitespace characters with a specified string.

**Pros and Cons:**

* `replace()`: Pros:
	+ Widely supported across browsers
	+ Fast execution time due to native implementation
	Cons:
	+ May not work as expected if the input is not a string or contains invalid regular expressions
* `replaceAll(string)`: Pros:
	+ Easier to understand and use than `replace()` for simple cases
	Cons:
	+ May not be optimized for performance, as it's just an alias around `replace()`
* `replaceAll(regex)`: Pros:
	+ More flexible than `replace()`, allowing for more complex regular expressions
	Cons:
	+ May have slower execution times due to the overhead of compiling and executing a regex pattern

**Library and purpose:**

In none of the test cases, a library is explicitly used. However, it's worth noting that the `RegExp` object is used in all three benchmark definitions.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

None are mentioned in this specific benchmark.

**Other alternatives:**

1. **Using String.prototype.replace() with a callback function**: Instead of using the `replace()` method, you can use the `String.prototype.replace()` method with a callback function to achieve similar results.
2. **Using String.prototype.replaceAll() (if available)**: Some browsers and platforms provide a non-standard `replaceAll()` method on strings. However, this is not widely supported and may not be the best approach for benchmarking performance.

To run these benchmarks using MeasureThat.net, you would need to:

1. Create an account on MeasureThat.net
2. Click "Create Benchmark" and fill in the required information (e.g., script preparation code, HTML preparation code)
3. Add the individual test cases as described above
4. Run the benchmark by clicking the "Run Benchmark" button

Related benchmarks:

replace vs replaceAll (native) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: replace vs replaceAll (regex) vs replaceAll (string)

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

replace

replaceAll (regex)

replaceAll (string)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):