Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Suffix search with String Reverse, Split vs Spread
(version: 0)
When reversing a string, is spread or split more efficient
Comparing performance of:
<= ES5 Split vs >= ES6 Spread
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
var str = "this is an example user supplied string of some length"; var search = "length";
Tests:
<= ES5 Split
str.split('').reverse().join('').indexOf(search.split('').reverse().join('')) === 0
>= ES6 Spread
[...str].reverse().join('').indexOf([...search].reverse().join('')) === 0
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
<= ES5 Split
>= ES6 Spread
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, the different approaches compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches for searching a reversed string in JavaScript: 1. Using `split` method 2. Using spread operator (`...`) The script preparation code provides a sample user-supplied string `str` and a search term `search`. **Approaches Compared** There are two test cases: 1. `<= ES5 Split`: This approach uses the `split` method to reverse the strings, like this: `str.split('').reverse().join('')` 2. `>= ES6 Spread`: This approach uses the spread operator (`...`) to reverse the strings, like this: `[...str].reverse().join('')` **Pros and Cons** ### `<= ES5 Split` (Older JavaScript Syntax) Pros: * Widespread support in older browsers * Generally faster execution time due to shorter string manipulation Cons: * Less readable code * May not be as efficient as newer syntax ### `>= ES6 Spread` (Newer JavaScript Syntax) Pros: * More readable code * Better performance and conciseness Cons: * Requires support for modern browsers * May have slight performance overhead due to additional operations **Other Considerations** * Both approaches require the same amount of processing power, as the reversal operation is symmetric. * The benchmark measures the execution time of the reversed strings search. **Library Used** None in this specific benchmark. However, note that some JavaScript engines might use optimized libraries or built-in functions to improve performance. **Special JS Feature/ Syntax** There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark. **Alternatives** If you wanted to test other approaches, here are a few examples: * Using `join` and concatenation instead of splitting: `str + 'a' + (str.split('').reverse().join('') + 'b')` * Using regular expressions: `/^(...)+$/i` Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as efficient or readable as the two approaches compared in this benchmark. I hope this explanation helps!
Related benchmarks:
String split vs Regex
String.proptotype.split vs spread operator
String.split vs String.substring
string.split(RegExp); vs string.split(string);
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?