Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Изменение строки
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
slice vs substring vs replace vs substr
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var str = "014b6832"; var sstr = "125g4371" // var por = 1; var nstr = "";
Tests:
slice
nstr = str.slice(0, 3)+sstr[3]+str.slice(4); nstr = "";
substring
nstr = str.substring(0, 3)+sstr[3]+str.substring(4); nstr = "";
replace
nstr = str.replace("b", sstr[3]); nstr = "";
substr
nstr = str.substr(0, 3)+sstr[3]+str.substr(4); nstr = "";
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
slice
substring
replace
substr
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of different string manipulation methods in JavaScript: `slice`, `substring`, `replace`, and `substr`. The test case uses a specific string (`str`) with a fixed length, and each method is applied to it in a specific way. **Script Preparation Code** The script preparation code sets up the variables: ```javascript var str = "014b6832"; var sstr = "125g4371"; // var por = 1; var nstr = ""; ``` The variable `por` (line comment) is commented out, suggesting it might be an optional parameter or a test case variation. **Html Preparation Code** There is no HTML preparation code provided, which suggests that the benchmark only tests JavaScript code and does not rely on HTML-specific features. **Individual Test Cases** Each test case defines a specific benchmarking scenario: 1. **slice**: `nstr = str.slice(0, 3)+sstr[3]+str.slice(4); nstr = "";` 2. **substring**: `nstr = str.substring(0, 3)+sstr[3]+str.substring(4); nstr = "";` 3. **replace**: `nstr = str.replace("b", sstr[3]); nstr = "";` 4. **substr**: `nstr = str.substr(0, 3)+sstr[3]+str.substr(4); nstr = "";` **Library and Special JS Features** There are no libraries mentioned in the benchmark definition or test cases. However, some special JavaScript features might be used: * `slice`, `substring`, and `substr` methods are native string methods. * The `replace()` method uses a regular expression pattern (`"b"`). * The ` exec()` function is not explicitly called; instead, the `replace()` method returns the modified string. **Pros and Cons of Different Approaches** Here's a brief overview of each approach: 1. **slice**: This method creates a new string by extracting a subset of characters from the original string. It's generally faster than `substring` because it avoids creating an intermediate string. * Pros: fast, efficient * Cons: might create a temporary object on the heap 2. **substring**: This method also extracts a subset of characters from the original string but creates an intermediate string as part of the process. * Pros: easy to understand, works for most use cases * Cons: slower than `slice`, potentially inefficient due to intermediate object creation 3. **replace**: This method uses regular expressions and might be slower than the other methods because it involves additional processing steps. * Pros: flexible, can handle more complex patterns * Cons: might be slower, requires careful handling of special cases (e.g., backreferences) 4. **substr**: Similar to `slice`, this method creates a new string by extracting a subset of characters from the original string. * Pros: similar performance profile to `slice` * Cons: slightly less efficient due to a different implementation **Other Alternatives** Some alternative methods for string manipulation might include: * Using native Web APIs (e.g., `TextDecoder`, `TextEncoder`) for encoding and decoding strings * Leveraging specialized libraries or frameworks for advanced string processing tasks (e.g., regular expressions, text analysis) * Employing custom algorithms or data structures (e.g., suffix trees, trie-based searching) However, these alternatives are not represented in this specific benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
TextDecoder
Normalize digits
parseInt vs charCodeAt
TextDecoder vs String.fromCharCode vs String.fromCodePoint
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?