Benchmark: Regex vs multiple split/join

Script Preparation code:

var str = 'really rare  (Phone number hidden by company) (Email hidden by company)';

Tests:

Regex
str.replace(/(\[TL_HIDDEN\])|(\[EMAIL_HIDDEN\])|(Phone number hidden by company)|(Email hidden by company)/g, "");
Multiple Split and Join
str.split('(Phone number hidden by company)') .join('') .split('(Email hidden by company)') .join('') .split('[TL_HIDDEN]') .join('') .split('[EMAIL_HIDDEN]') .join('');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Regex
Multiple Split and Join

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.

Let's break down what's being tested in the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark compares two approaches to remove hidden phone numbers and email addresses from a string:

1. **Regex (Regular Expression)**: The first test case uses a regular expression to match and replace the patterns `(Phone number hidden by company)`, `(Email hidden by company)`, `[TL_HIDDEN]`, and `[EMAIL Hidden]`. This approach is often used for text processing, pattern matching, and validation.
2. **Multiple Split and Join**: The second test case uses multiple `split()` and `join()` methods to remove the hidden patterns from the string. This approach involves splitting the string into substrings using specific patterns, filtering out the unwanted parts, and then joining the remaining parts back together.

**Options compared**

These two approaches are being compared to measure their performance. The test results will show which method is faster and more efficient for this specific task.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Regex**:
	* Pros:
		+ Can be highly expressive and flexible, making it suitable for complex pattern matching.
		+ Often faster than multiple string operations.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower if the regular expression is too complex or hard to optimize.
		+ May require more computational resources due to the overhead of compiling and executing the regex engine.
2. **Multiple Split and Join**:
	* Pros:
		+ Often simpler to understand and implement, especially for simple cases.
		+ Can be faster if the string operations are optimized or if multiple threads are used.
	* Cons:
		+ May require more code and maintenance due to the need to handle each pattern separately.
		+ Less flexible than regex, making it less suitable for complex patterns.

**Library/Utility**

In this case, there is no specific library or utility mentioned. The tests only rely on standard JavaScript methods: `replace()`, `split()`, and `join()`.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are a few special features used in the benchmark:

* **Backreferences**: In the regex test case, the `\1` backreference is used to match the first captured group (`\(Phone number hidden by company\)`). This allows the regex engine to reference previously matched groups.
* **Whitespace characters**: The `split()` method in both tests uses whitespace characters (`\r\n`) as separators. This implies that the string contains newline characters, which are not explicitly shown in the provided code.

**Other alternatives**

If you need to compare other approaches for removing hidden phone numbers and email addresses from a string, some alternatives could be:

* Using a **string replacement library**, like `replace` or `escapeRegExp`, which might provide faster performance and more features.
* Employing a **text processing framework**, such as `dompurify` or `sanitize.js`, designed specifically for web application security.
* Using a **machine learning-based approach**, where the hidden patterns are learned from a dataset, making it possible to adapt to new formats.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would depend on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

Related benchmarks:

Regex vs multiple split/join (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Regex vs Multiple Split and Join

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Regex

Multiple Split and Join

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):