Benchmark: sadsadsadsa - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

split-join
'Abcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxyAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy'.split('\t').join(' ');
regex
'Abcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxyAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy'.replace(new RegExp('\t', 'g'), ' ');
loop
let str = 'Abcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxyAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy' let res = ''; for (let i = 0; i < str.length; i++) { if (str.charAt(i) === '\t' ) { res += ' '; } else { res += str.charAt(i); } }
function
'Abcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxyAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy\tAbcd\tefghij\tklmnopqrstuv\twxy'.replaceAll('\t', ' ');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
split-join
regex
loop
function

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:95.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/95.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 95 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
split-join	752130.0 Ops/sec
regex	982066.2 Ops/sec
loop	733113.6 Ops/sec
function	1070924.6 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring JavaScript performance can be challenging due to its dynamic nature and the many libraries, features, and syntaxes available.

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition for four test cases: `split-join`, `regex`, `loop`, and `function`. The test case with `Function` is using the String.prototype.replaceAll method.

Here are some key points about each option being compared:

1.  **String.prototype.replace() (Regex)**

*   This method replaces a specified value with another specified value, allowing you to specify replacement options.
    *   Pros: Can be more efficient when working with complex patterns and large strings due to its capabilities in handling this.
    *   Cons: More computationally expensive than the `replaceAll` function. It is necessary if you want to replace a pattern that may contain special characters.

2.  **String.prototype.replaceAll()**

*   This method replaces all occurrences of a specified value with another specified value, allowing you to specify replacement options.
    *   Pros: More efficient and faster than the `replace()` function as it does not need to handle complex patterns like regex does.
    *   Cons: May be less flexible when working with complex patterns due to its lack of support for special characters.

3.  **Loop**

*   This approach uses a manual loop to iterate through each character in the string, appending space if the current value is tab.
    *   Pros: It can handle non-ASCII values well as it does not rely on regex capabilities or `replaceAll` function's behavior with different encoding. Also, loops are generally faster because they do not have to parse strings according to some rules and don't use regular expressions.
    *   Cons: Can be more difficult to work with due to its manual nature and potential for errors if the loop is not properly implemented.

4.  **String.prototype.split() and String.prototype.join()**

*   This method splits a string into an array of substrings based on a specified separator, then joins them back together.
    *   Pros: Can be more efficient than loops when working with simple cases where the separator is known.
    *   Cons: May not be suitable for large or complex strings due to its potential performance impact.

In terms of libraries used in these test cases, none are explicitly mentioned. However, they may involve some standard JavaScript functions and methods like `split()`, `join()`, `replace()`, and various regex-related functions.

Special JS features or syntaxes used here include the use of the tab character `\t` for spacing purposes.

Now, let's explore the alternatives to these approaches:

*   **Native string manipulation**: For handling strings in a more efficient way you could consider using native methods like `split()`, `join()` and `replaceAll()`. String methods will be faster than loops when dealing with large data.
*   **Regexp objects**: For cases that require regular expressions, you can use regexp objects. Regexp objects provide the most precise match functionality of any string manipulation method.
*   **String.prototype.replaceAll() vs replace()**: In general `replaceAll()` is more efficient because it does not need to handle complex patterns like regex does.

As for other alternatives:

*   **Regular expression with String.replace():** This would require using a regular expression pattern in the replacement function, which could be time-consuming and error-prone.
*   **Native String.prototype.replaceAll()**: If the replace() method doesn't support special characters as expected, you might have to use `replaceAll()` or loop-based methods.

Here are some recommendations for each test case:

1.  **split-join:** Consider using `String.prototype.split()` and `String.prototype.join()` when dealing with simple cases where the separator is known.
2.  **regex:** Use regex objects if you need more precise match functionality, but be aware of their potential performance impact.
3.  **loop:** Consider using loops for handling non-ASCII values or large strings due to their manual nature and lack of reliance on regex capabilities.
4.  **function (replaceAll):** Use the `replaceAll()` method when working with complex patterns that require replacement options, but be aware of its potential performance impact compared to the `replace()` function.

In conclusion, each approach has its pros and cons, and the choice ultimately depends on the specific requirements and complexity of your project.

Related benchmarks:

sadsadsadsa (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: split-join vs regex vs loop vs function

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

split-join

regex

loop

function

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):