Benchmark: hasHtmlTags v2 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

const pattern = /(&[^\s]*;|<\/?\w+((\s+\w+(\s*=\s*(?:".*?"|'.*?'|[\^'">\s]+))?)+\s*|\s*)\/?>)/;

Tests:

test
var value = 'Every time you sign into CAM4, you will see only <strong class="switch-gender-type"></strong> content by default. You can update this at any time by visiting to your <a href="/studio/Stefan_ST/settings/" target="_blank">Account Settings</a>' const pattern = /(&[^\s]*;|<\/?\w+((\s+\w+(\s*=\s*(?:".*?"|'.*?'|[\^'">\s]+))?)+\s*|\s*)\/?>)/; console.log(pattern.test(value))
search
var value = 'Every time you sign into CAM4, you will see only <strong class="switch-gender-type"></strong> content by default. You can update this at any time by visiting to your <a href="/studio/Stefan_ST/settings/" target="_blank">Account Settings</a>' const pattern = /(&[^\s]*;|<\/?\w+((\s+\w+(\s*=\s*(?:".*?"|'.*?'|[\^'">\s]+))?)+\s*|\s*)\/?>)/; console.log(value.search(pattern))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test
search

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark called "hasHtmlTags v2". This benchmark is designed to measure the performance of two different approaches: using the `test()` method and the `search()` method to find HTML tags in a given string.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition provides the necessary setup for the test cases. Here's what's tested:

* The `Script Preparation Code` defines a regular expression pattern (`pattern`) that matches HTML tags.
* The `Html Preparation Code` is empty, which means no HTML content is provided for the tests.

**Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **test**: This test case uses the `test()` method to execute the regular expression pattern on a given string. The string contains HTML tags and is identical in both test cases.
2. **search**: This test case uses the `search()` method to find the first occurrence of the regular expression pattern in the same string.

**Comparison of Options**

The two approaches are compared, which highlights their pros and cons:

* **test() method**:
	+ Pros:
		- More intuitive and easy to understand.
		- Can be more readable for those familiar with it.
	+ Cons:
		- May be slower due to the overhead of function calls and context creation.
* **search() method**:
	+ Pros:
		- Often faster, as it's a native method and can take advantage of browser optimizations.
	+ Cons:
		- Less intuitive for those unfamiliar with it.

**Library and Special JS Features**

In this benchmark, no external libraries are used. However, the regular expression pattern (`pattern`) is a built-in JavaScript feature that allows you to search for patterns in strings.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between `test()` and `search()`, consider the following factors:

* Readability: If code readability is more important than performance, use the `test()` method.
* Performance: If speed is critical, use the `search()` method. However, this may come at the cost of readability.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to measure string searching performance, consider:

1. **String.prototype.indexOf()**: Another built-in JavaScript method that can be used for string searching.
2. **NativeWeb APIs (e.g., WebCue)**: If you need to perform advanced text matching or regular expression operations, consider using native web APIs like Web Cue.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach ultimately depends on your specific use case and performance requirements.

Related benchmarks:

hasHtmlTags v2 (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: test vs search

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

test

search

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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