Benchmark: jssplttttttt - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var strTxt = Array(100000).fill("@".repeat(128)).join(" "), len = 2;

Tests:

testttttt
var ar = strTxt.matchAll(new RegExp('.{1,'+len+'}','g')); console.log(ar.next().value[0]);
tesstttt2
var ar = []; for(i=0,y=0;i<Math.ceil(strTxt.length/len);i++,y=i*len){ ar[i] = strTxt.slice(y,y+len); } console.log(ar[0]);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
testttttt
tesstttt2

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.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark definition and test cases represent two different approaches to measure the performance of splitting a large string into substrings.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition consists of two parts:

1. **Script Preparation Code**: This code initializes a variable `strTxt` with a large string containing 100,000 repetitions of a specific character (`@`). The length of each repetition is determined by another variable `len`, which is set to 2.
2. **Html Preparation Code**: This field is empty in the provided benchmark definition.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Test Case 1: Using `matchAll`**
```javascript
var ar = strTxt.matchAll(new RegExp('.{1,'+len+'}','g'));
console.log(ar.next().value[0]);
```
This code uses the `matchAll` method of the `String` prototype to split the large string into an array of matches. The regular expression used is `. {1,}` + `len`, which matches any character (including newline) between 1 and `len` times. The `g` flag at the end of the regular expression makes it match all occurrences in the string.

2. **Test Case 2: Manual Iteration**
```javascript
var ar = [];
for(i=0,y=0;i<Math.ceil(strTxt.length/len);i++,y=i*len){
    ar[i] = strTxt.slice(y,y+len);
}
console.log(ar[0]);
```
This code uses a manual loop to split the large string into an array of substrings. The loop iterates over the length of the string, and for each iteration, it extracts a substring of length `len` starting from the current index `y`.

**Comparison of Approaches**

The two approaches have different pros and cons:

1. **Using `matchAll`**: This approach is more concise and efficient, as it uses the optimized regular expression engine to split the string. However, it may not be as fast for very large strings or if the regular expression pattern is complex.
2. **Manual Iteration**: This approach provides more control over the iteration process and allows for easier debugging. However, it can be slower due to the overhead of manual loop logic.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There are no libraries explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, JavaScript's built-in `String` prototype methods, such as `matchAll`, are used.

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these test cases.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to measure the performance of splitting a large string include:

1. **Using other string manipulation functions**, such as `split()` or `substring()`.
2. **Using parallel processing techniques**, such as `Map` or `Promise.all()`, to split the string concurrently.
3. **Measuring the performance of different string encodings**, such as UTF-8 or ASCII.

Note that MeasureThat.net's benchmarking framework allows users to explore these alternatives and compare their performance with the two approaches provided in the test cases.

Related benchmarks:

jssplttttttt (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: testttttt vs tesstttt2

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

testttttt

tesstttt2

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):