Benchmark: TestRegexPerf - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

SplitandMatch
const os_info=` PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster)" NAME="Debian GNU/Linux" VERSION_ID="10" VERSION="10 (buster)" VERSION_CODENAME=buster ID=debian HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/" SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support" BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/" VOLUMIO_BUILD_VERSION="95bed0e5825b461169eaaff10b01e9aeecda25eb" VOLUMIO_FE_VERSION="ed2e4c0b70494d6fd7e32a54185637d6ee8c59f5" VOLUMIO_FE3_VERSION="f249d10bb7f812af7dbcb63cdffaecc92ebb0b5f" VOLUMIO_BE_VERSION="1c805a30bea144ace167da5eea23fab80577e5aa" VOLUMIO_ARCH="armv7" VOLUMIO_VARIANT="volumio" VOLUMIO_TEST="FALSE" VOLUMIO_BUILD_DATE="Thu Feb 27 01:56:20 UTC 2020" VOLUMIO_VERSION="3.00" VOLUMIO_HARDWARE="orangepilite" VOLUMIO_HASH="1398018d1a9f99e792897adce084fb5d" `; var file = os_info.split('\n'); var releaseinfo = { 'systemversion': null, 'builddate': null, 'variant': null, 'hardware':null }; //console.log(file); var nLines = file.length; var str; for (var l = 0; l < nLines; l++) { if (file[l].match(/VOLUMIO_VERSION/i)) { str = file[l].split('='); releaseinfo.systemversion = str[1].replace(/\"/gi, ""); } if (file[l].match(/VOLUMIO_BUILD_DATE/i)) { str = file[l].split('='); releaseinfo.builddate = str[1].replace(/\"/gi, ""); } if (file[l].match(/VOLUMIO_VARIANT/i)) { str = file[l].split('='); releaseinfo.variant = str[1].replace(/\"/gi, ""); } if (file[l].match(/VOLUMIO_HARDWARE/i)) { str = file[l].split('='); releaseinfo.hardware = str[1].replace(/\"/gi, ""); } }
RegExExec
const os_info=` PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster)" NAME="Debian GNU/Linux" VERSION_ID="10" VERSION="10 (buster)" VERSION_CODENAME=buster ID=debian HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/" SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support" BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/" VOLUMIO_BUILD_VERSION="95bed0e5825b461169eaaff10b01e9aeecda25eb" VOLUMIO_FE_VERSION="ed2e4c0b70494d6fd7e32a54185637d6ee8c59f5" VOLUMIO_FE3_VERSION="f249d10bb7f812af7dbcb63cdffaecc92ebb0b5f" VOLUMIO_BE_VERSION="1c805a30bea144ace167da5eea23fab80577e5aa" VOLUMIO_ARCH="armv7" VOLUMIO_VARIANT="volumio" VOLUMIO_TEST="FALSE" VOLUMIO_BUILD_DATE="Thu Feb 27 01:56:20 UTC 2020" VOLUMIO_VERSION="3.00" VOLUMIO_HARDWARE="orangepilite" VOLUMIO_HASH="1398018d1a9f99e792897adce084fb5d" `; const osReleaseFile = os_info; const releaseInfo = { systemversion: 'VOLUMIO_VERSION', builddate: 'VOLUMIO_BUILD_DATE', variant: 'VOLUMIO_VARIANT', hardware: 'VOLUMIO_HARDWARE' }; for (const key in releaseInfo) { const needle = releaseInfo[key]; const regEx = new RegExp(`^${needle}=(.*)$`, 'gm'); // overkill const res = regEx.exec(osReleaseFile); // No need to check if we actually captured something, will be null if (res) { releaseInfo[key] = res[1].replace(/^"|"$/g, ''); } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
SplitandMatch
RegExExec

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.

Measuring performance in JavaScript can be challenging due to the language's dynamic nature and vast number of libraries, frameworks, and built-in functions.

**Benchmarking Basics**

The provided JSON represents two test cases for measuring regular expression (RegExp) execution performance: "SplitandMatch" and "RegExExec". Both tests aim to find specific information within a given string (`os_info`).

**Options Compared**

In the "SplitandMatch" test, three approaches are compared:

1. **Manual parsing**: The code manually splits the `os_info` string into lines using `\r\n` as the separator and then iterates through each line to extract desired information.
2. **Regular expressions (RegExp)**: A RegExp is used to match specific patterns within the `os_info` string, extracting required values (e.g., system version, build date, variant, and hardware).
3. **String search with `exec()`**: The code uses a RegExp with `exec()` method to find matches for each extracted value.

In the "RegExExec" test, only two approaches are compared:

1. **Regular expressions (RegExp)**: A single RegExp is used to match specific patterns within the `os_info` string.
2. **String search with `exec()`**: The code uses a RegExp with `exec()` method to find matches for each extracted value.

**Pros and Cons**

*   **Manual parsing**:
    *   Pros: Easy to understand, no additional dependencies required.
    *   Cons: Error-prone, can be slow due to manual iteration through lines.
*   **RegExp**:
    *   Pros: Efficient, flexible, and easy to use for pattern matching.
    *   Cons: Can be slower than manual parsing if used inefficiently (e.g., using complex patterns).
*   **String search with `exec()`**:
    *   Pros: Fast, efficient, and easy to use for simple cases.
    *   Cons: May not work correctly if the input string is malformed or has varying formatting.

**Best Practices**

When measuring performance in JavaScript:

1.  Profile your code using tools like Chrome DevTools, Node.js Inspector, or V8's built-in profiler.
2.  Test with different inputs and edge cases to ensure robustness.
3.  Optimize code by reducing unnecessary computations or caching results.
4.  Consider using more efficient data structures or algorithms if possible.

Keep in mind that the best approach will depend on your specific use case, performance requirements, and JavaScript version.

Related benchmarks:

TestRegexPerf (version: 0)

Quick check

Comparing performance of: SplitandMatch vs RegExExec

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

SplitandMatch

RegExExec

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):