Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
RegEx.match vs. startWith2
(version: 1)
a
Comparing performance of:
String.startsWith vs String.match vs startsWith
Created:
one year ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var string = "Hello world!"; var regex = /Hello/;
Tests:
String.startsWith
string.startsWith("Hello");
String.match
string.match(regex);
startsWith
string.startsWith("Hello");
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (3)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
String.startsWith
String.match
startsWith
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; rv:135.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/135.0
Browser/OS:
Firefox 135 on Mac OS X 10.15
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
String.startsWith
1972865920.0 Ops/sec
String.match
39209064.0 Ops/sec
startsWith
1977266048.0 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
gpt-4o-mini
, generated one year ago):
The benchmark provided compares the performance of two different methods for checking if a string begins with a specified substring: `String.startsWith()` and `String.match()` using a regular expression. Here's a detailed breakdown of the benchmark, the tested approaches, their pros and cons, and other considerations: ### Tested Approaches 1. **String.startsWith()** - **Code:** `string.startsWith("Hello");` - **Purpose:** This method checks if the string starts with a specified substring. It returns `true` or `false`. - **Pros:** - Simple and straightforward to use. - Optimized for performance as it is a fundamental string method. - More readable than regular expressions for substring checks. - **Cons:** - Limited to checking the starting substring only; does not support complex patterns. 2. **String.match()** - **Code:** `string.match(regex);` where `regex` is defined as `/Hello/`. - **Purpose:** This method retrieves the matches when matching a string against a regular expression. - **Pros:** - Supports more complex patterns, allowing for flexible string matching. - Can find all occurrences or elements that meet specific criteria based on regex rules. - **Cons:** - Generally slower than `startsWith()` for this specific use case due to the overhead involved in pattern matching. - The syntax can be less readable, especially for those unfamiliar with regular expressions. ### Alternatives Other alternatives to these methods could include: - **Using `indexOf()`:** You could check the index of a substring and determine if it starts at position zero: ```javascript string.indexOf("Hello") === 0; ``` - **Pros:** A long-standing method in JavaScript; very readable. - **Cons:** Not as efficient as `startsWith()` for this specific task as it returns the index rather than a boolean result. - **Using regular expressions with anchors:** A regex can also be used directly to match the start of a string: ```javascript /^Hello/.test(string); ``` - **Pros:** More flexible than `startsWith()` and can be easily modified for different patterns. - **Cons:** More complex and likely slower than the dedicated `startsWith()` method. ### Test Results Summary The benchmark results indicate the performance of each method in terms of executions per second: - **`startsWith`**: 1,977,266,048 executions/second - **`String.startsWith`**: 1,972,865,920 executions/second - **`String.match`**: 39,209,064 executions/second ### Conclusion The results show that the two `startsWith` variants are significantly faster than using `match()` with a regex, affirming the efficiency of dedicated string methods for simple checks. While `String.match()` offers more versatility for complex matching scenarios, it is generally inappropriate for straightforward prefix checks due to its performance overhead. For engineers, opting for `startsWith()` is preferred when dealing with simple substring checking, while `match()` should be reserved for cases demanding regular expression capabilities.
Related benchmarks:
RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match
RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match v2
RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs String.match(regex) for starting string
RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match1
RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match(Regex)
RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs String.startsWith
RegEx.test vs. String.includes x 2
RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs String.startsWith abc123
RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs String.startsWith vs ===
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?