Benchmark: RegEx.test vs. Inline RegEx.test

Script Preparation code:

var string = "Hello world!";
var regex = /Hello/;

Tests:

RegEx.test
regex.test(string);
Inline
/Hello/.test(string);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
Inline

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one month ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/134.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 134 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RegEx.test	64519428.0 Ops/sec
Inline	59108384.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches for testing regular expressions (RegEx) in JavaScript: using a dedicated function `regex.test()` and using inline RegEx tests with the `/` syntax.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **`regex.test(string)`**: This approach uses a separate function, `regex.test()`, to execute the RegEx test.
2. **`/Hello/.test(string)`**: This approach uses inline RegEx testing with the `/` syntax.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**`regex.test()` Approach:**

Pros:

* Separation of concerns: The function is specifically designed for testing, making it easier to maintain and reuse.
* Potential for optimization: The implementation of `test()` might be optimized for performance.

Cons:

* Overhead of function call: Creating a new function object and executing the test might incur some overhead.

**Inline RegEx Testing (`/Hello/.test(string)`)**

Pros:

* Simple and concise: Inline testing is straightforward and easy to read.
* Fewer overheads compared to creating a separate function.

Cons:

* Limited reusability: The inline RegEx test is tied to the specific string being tested, making it harder to reuse.

**Other Considerations**

Both approaches have implications for the JavaScript engine's caching and optimization mechanisms. The `regex.test()` approach might benefit from more aggressive caching and inlining due to its dedicated function nature. In contrast, the inline RegEx testing approach might be subject to more frequent cache invalidation and potential performance regressions.

**Library/Function**

No specific libraries or functions are mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that `regex.test()` is likely a part of the JavaScript language itself or a widely available library function.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The benchmark uses regular expressions (RegEx) which are a built-in feature of JavaScript. No special syntax or features beyond standard RegEx are used in this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

For measuring performance, you can consider using other frameworks and tools like:

* WebPageTest: A comprehensive tool for web performance testing.
* Google's Benchmarking Tool: A benchmarking library for Node.js applications.
* Microbenchmark (for JavaScript): A popular microbenchmarking library.

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives has its strengths, weaknesses, and specific use cases.

Related benchmarks:

RegEx.test vs. Inline RegEx.test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs Inline

Created: 9 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

Inline

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):