Benchmark: new Url vs host RegEx test

Tests:

new URL
return new URL('https://is5-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple126/v4/00/33/2e/00332e58-b196-82cf-1231-82d81d6fe477/AppIcon_TikTok-0-0-1x_U007emarketing-0-0-0-7-0-0-sRGB-0-0-0-GLES2_U002c0-512MB-85-220-0-0.png/512x0w.png').origin;
RegEx
return 'https://is5-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple126/v4/00/33/2e/00332e58-b196-82cf-1231-82d81d6fe477/AppIcon_TikTok-0-0-1x_U007emarketing-0-0-0-7-0-0-sRGB-0-0-0-GLES2_U002c0-512MB-85-220-0-0.png/512x0w.png'.match(/^(?:(?:http|ftp|https):\/\/)?((?:[\w.-]*)\.(?:[\w]*))/)[0]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
new URL
RegEx

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/138.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 138 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
new URL	651019.9 Ops/sec
RegEx	9282021.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is used to compare the performance of different approaches for parsing URLs in JavaScript. The benchmark consists of two test cases:

1. "new URL"
2. "RegEx"

The goal is to determine which approach is faster, with more executions per second (ExecutionsPerSecond).

**Options being compared**

For each test case, there are two options being compared:

* **new URL**: This option uses the built-in `URL` API to parse the URL.
* **RegEx**: This option uses a regular expression (RegEx) pattern to extract the hostname from the URL.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

### new URL

Pros:

* More modern and efficient, as it's part of the ECMAScript standard.
* Handles more complex URL formats, such as internationalized domain names (IDNs).

Cons:

* May have performance overhead due to its inherent complexity.
* Requires support for the `URL` API, which may not be enabled by default in all environments.

### RegEx

Pros:

* Fast and lightweight, with low memory usage.
* Can be optimized for specific URL patterns.

Cons:

* Less modern and less efficient than the `new URL` API.
* May not handle complex URL formats as well as the `new URL` API.

**Library used**

In the benchmark, a library is not explicitly mentioned. However, it's likely that the `URL` API is being used to parse URLs, which is a built-in JavaScript feature since ECMAScript 5.

**Special JS features or syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The only feature being utilized is the `URL` API, which is a standard part of modern JavaScript.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are some options:

* **URI.js**: A lightweight library for parsing and manipulating URLs.
* **Url-parser**: Another lightweight library for parsing URLs.
* **Regular expression patterns**: You could try optimizing your own RegEx pattern to extract the hostname from URLs.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have trade-offs in terms of performance, complexity, or compatibility with different browsers and environments.

Related benchmarks:

new Url vs host RegEx test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: new URL vs RegEx

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

new URL

RegEx

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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