Benchmark: Search RegExp vs includes vs match

Script Preparation code:

var issues = [{
        name: "Take trash out",
        id: 1,
        state: "open"
    },
    {
        name: "Make a laundry",
        id: 2,
        state: "open"
    },
    {
        name: "Meet a friend in KFC",
        id: 3,
        state: "open"
    }
];
var search = "take";
var regexp = new RegExp(search,'i');

Tests:

RegEx.test
issues.filter(function(issue) {return regexp.test(issue.name)});
String.includes
issues.filter(function(issue) {return issue.name.toLowerCase().includes(search.toLowerCase())});
String.match
issues.filter(function(issue) { return issue.name.toLowerCase().match(search.toLowerCase())});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
String.includes
String.match

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

RegEx.test

5.5M/s

String.includes

4.3M/s

String.match

2.0M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ RegEx.test	5,546,116 Ops/sec
String.includes	4,310,142 Ops/sec
String.match	1,982,271 Ops/sec

Search RegExp vs includes vs match (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `RegEx.test vs String.includes vs String.match`

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

String.match

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Search RegExp vs includes vs match (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs String.includes vs String.match

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

String.match

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Comparing performance of: `RegEx.test vs String.includes vs String.match`