Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
test regex js
(version: 0)
coucou
Comparing performance of:
regex vs noregex
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var a = "/1231231" var b = "121312321"
Tests:
regex
console.log(/^\//.test(a)); console.log(/^\//.test(b));
noregex
console.log(a.startsWith("/")) console.log(b.startsWith("/"))
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
regex
noregex
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 dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark. **Benchmark Definition** The provided JSON represents the benchmark definition, which includes: * `Script Preparation Code`: This code is executed before running the test cases. In this case, it defines two variables: `a` and `b`, both containing string literals. * `Html Preparation Code`: There's no HTML preparation code specified in this example. **Individual Test Cases** There are two test cases: 1. **"regex"`**: This test case runs a single JavaScript statement that uses the `/` character as a regular expression (regex) to search for a pattern in both strings `a` and `b`. The `console.log()` statements will output whether or not the regex matches. 2. **"noregex"`**: This test case also runs two `console.log()` statements, but instead of using regex, it uses the `startsWith()` method to check if each string starts with `/`. **Options Compared** The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches: * Using regex (`"regex"` test case) * Not using regex (`"noregex"` test case) **Pros and Cons of Each Approach:** **Regex (":regex")** Pros: * Robust pattern matching capabilities * Can handle complex patterns Cons: * Typically slower than non-regex approaches due to the overhead of parsing and executing the regex syntax * May have performance implications for certain use cases, like string manipulation or data validation **Non-Regex (`"noregex"`)** Pros: * Generally faster than regex due to fewer operations required (string comparison) * Suitable for simple string matching tasks Cons: * Less powerful pattern matching capabilities compared to regex * May not be suitable for complex pattern matching requirements **Library: `startsWith()`** In the `"noregex"` test case, the `startsWith()` method is used. This is a built-in JavaScript method that checks if a string starts with a specified value. It's a simple and efficient way to perform this type of comparison. **Special JS Feature/ Syntax: None** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. Both test cases use standard JavaScript methods and operators. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative approaches to string matching, consider the following: * Using a dedicated string manipulation library like `lodash.string` * Utilizing a regex engine with improved performance, such as ` RegExp` (though still slower than non-regex approaches) * Leveraging hardware-accelerated string comparisons on some platforms Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your specific use case and performance requirements. I hope this explanation helps you understand what's being tested in this MeasureThat.net benchmark!
Related benchmarks:
.test vs .match vs modulo(string)
isNaN vs regex test for stringify number check
parseFloat isNaN vs RegEx parseFloat
parseFloat isNaN vs RegEx parseFloat vs Number isNaN
regex vs js - not Alphanumeric String
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?