Benchmark: replacing test - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

function doReplace(str) {
    return str = str.substring(0, str.length - 3);
}

Tests:

doReplace
var str = doReplace('https://google.com/to')
replace
var str1 = 'https://google.com/'.replace('/to')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
doReplace
replace

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided benchmark definition is a JavaScript function `doReplace` that takes a string as input, removes 3 characters from its end, and returns the resulting string. The script preparation code for this benchmark defines the `doReplace` function.

**Script Preparation Code**
```javascript
function doReplace(str) {
    return str = str.substring(0, str.length - 3);
}
```
This code defines a function `doReplace` that uses the `substring` method to extract a subset of characters from the input string. The `str =` syntax is used for assignment, which can lead to unexpected behavior.

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided, so we'll assume it's not relevant to this benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

The test cases are two separate benchmarks:

1. **doReplace**
```javascript
var str = doReplace('https://google.com/to');
```
This test case creates a variable `str` and assigns the result of calling the `doReplace` function with the input string `'https://google.com/to'`.

2. **replace**
```javascript
var str1 = 'https://google.com/'.replace('/to');
```
This test case creates a variable `str1` and uses the `replace()` method on a string literal to remove the '/to' substring from the original string.

**Comparison of Approaches**

The two approaches used in these benchmarks are:

1. **Substring manipulation** (doReplace): This approach involves using the `substring` method to extract a subset of characters from the input string.
2. **String replacement** (replace): This approach uses the `replace()` method on a string literal to remove a specified substring.

Pros and Cons of each approach:

* **Substring manipulation**:
	+ Pros: Can be more flexible and allow for more complex replacements.
	+ Cons: Can lead to unexpected behavior due to the assignment syntax (`str = str.substring(...)`).
* **String replacement**:
	+ Pros: Generally safer and less prone to unexpected behavior, as it doesn't involve assignment.
	+ Cons: May not be as flexible or powerful as substring manipulation.

**Library**

None of the provided test cases use any external libraries. However, if we were to compare these approaches with other methods that might rely on libraries, we could consider:

* **Regular expressions**: These can provide more complex replacement logic, but may also introduce additional complexity and performance overhead.
* **String manipulation functions**: Some libraries (e.g., Lodash) offer string manipulation functions that could be used for replacements.

**Special JavaScript Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the provided code snippets. However, if we were to consider more advanced topics like:

* **Arrow functions**: These can provide concise and expressive ways to define small functions, but may not be relevant to this particular benchmark.
* **Async/await**: These can provide a more readable way to write asynchronous code, but are not directly applicable to the provided benchmarks.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches for replacing substrings in strings could include:

* Using a loop or recursion to iterate over the input string and replace characters manually.
* Utilizing a more advanced replacement method, such as using `String.prototype.replace()` with a callback function.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be relevant to this particular benchmark, and their trade-offs depend on specific requirements and constraints.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.104 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
doReplace	6047097.5 Ops/sec
replace	4646207.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

replacing test (version: 0)

test

Comparing performance of: doReplace vs replace

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

doReplace

replace

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 27 days ago):