Benchmark: Replace vs includes

Script Preparation code:

var message = 'LANG_ABC';

Tests:

Replace & use
const result = message.replace('LANG_', '').toLowerCase();
Validade before use
const result = message.includes('LANG_') ? message.replace('LANG_', '').toLowerCase() : '';

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Replace & use
Validade before use

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Replace & use	13827753.0 Ops/sec
Validade before use	8131327.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is focused on comparing two approaches to replace a substring from a string variable named `message`. The first approach uses the built-in `replace()` method, while the second approach checks if the original string includes the target substring using the `includes()` method before performing the replacement.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Replace & use**: This option uses the `replace()` method to remove the "LANG_" prefix from the `message` variable and then converts the result to lowercase using the `toLowerCase()` method.
2. **Validade before use**: This option checks if the original string includes the target substring using the `includes()` method. If it does, it removes the "LANG_" prefix from the `message` variable using the `replace()` method and then converts the result to lowercase using the `toLowerCase()` method.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Replace & use**:
	* Pros: This approach is likely to be faster since it eliminates the need for an additional check.
	* Cons: If the target substring is not present in the original string, this approach will return an empty string, which might not be desirable depending on the specific requirements of the application.
2. **Validade before use**:
	* Pros: This approach ensures that the replacement operation only occurs when the target substring is present in the original string, potentially reducing unnecessary work.
	* Cons: This approach may be slower due to the additional check and potential overhead of using `includes()`.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, no external libraries are being used besides JavaScript's built-in `replace()` and `toLowerCase()` methods.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are mentioned in the provided code. However, it's worth noting that some modern JavaScript engines may have optimizations for certain string operations, which could affect the performance of these benchmarks.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to compare with the two options above:

1. **Using a regular expression**: Instead of `replace()`, you could use a regular expression to remove the "LANG_" prefix from the `message` variable.
2. **Using a string method**: Depending on the specific requirements, other methods like `substring()` or `slice()` might be used to extract the desired substring.

In terms of benchmarking, MeasureThat.net provides a great way to compare the performance of different approaches, but it's essential to consider additional factors like:

* Edge cases: How will these benchmarks perform when dealing with edge cases, such as null or undefined inputs?
* Cache locality: Are there any cache-related considerations that could affect the performance of these benchmarks?

By considering these factors and exploring alternative approaches, you can gain a better understanding of the trade-offs involved in choosing an optimal solution for your specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

Replace vs includes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Replace & use vs Validade before use

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Replace & use

Validade before use

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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