var string = "Hello world!";
var regex = /[A-Z][a-z]+ [a-z]+/;
regex.exec(string);
string.match(regex);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
regex.exec | |
string.match |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
regex.exec | 27818670.0 Ops/sec |
string.match | 26962676.0 Ops/sec |
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.
What is being tested?
The provided benchmark compares two approaches to execute regular expressions (RegEx) in JavaScript:
regex.exec(string)
string.match(regex)
These two methods are used to search for a pattern within a string and return an array of matches, or null if no match is found.
Options compared:
There are two options being compared:
exec()
method to execute the regular expression.match()
method to search for a pattern in a string.Pros and Cons of each approach:
RegexExec (using exec())
Pros:
Cons:
match()
for simple patterns, since it needs to execute the entire pattern from scratch.StringMatch (using match())
Pros:
exec()
, since it can reuse cached results for similar patterns.Cons:
exec()
returns an object with the match or null.Library usage
In this benchmark, no external libraries are used. However, it's worth noting that both exec()
and match()
methods can be influenced by the JavaScript engine's optimization algorithms, which might introduce performance variations depending on the specific engine implementation.
Special JS feature or syntax
There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. The focus is solely on comparing two basic approaches to executing regular expressions.
Other alternatives
If you're looking for alternative methods to execute regular expressions, consider the following:
Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics compared to exec()
and match()
, so it's essential to test them separately if needed.