Benchmark: Split vs jin - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var str = 'https://document with spaces and two + characters +.pdf'

Tests:

Regex
str.replace(/\\+/g, "%2B");
split join
str.split("+").join("%2B");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Regex
split join

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help explain the provided JavaScript microbenchmark on MeasureThat.net.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark compares two approaches for replacing special characters in a string: using regular expressions (`Regex`) and splitting the string into parts and then joining them back together (`split join`).

**Options being compared:**

1. **Regular Expressions (Regex)**:
	* Purpose: Regular expressions are a powerful way to match patterns in strings.
	* Pros:
		+ Can be very efficient for complex pattern matching.
		+ Allows for capturing groups and other advanced features.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower than simple string manipulation methods due to the overhead of compiling regular expression patterns.
2. **Split Join**:
	* Purpose: Splitting a string into parts using a delimiter (in this case, `+`) and then joining them back together with another delimiter (`%2B`).
	* Pros:
		+ Can be faster than regular expressions for simple replacement tasks due to the reduced overhead.
3. **Other considerations**:

* The use of `%2B` as the replacement character is likely a URL-encoded version of `+`, which may impact performance.

**Library and special features:**

The benchmark uses no external libraries, but it does utilize some built-in JavaScript features:
	* Regular expressions (`RegExp`) are used for the `Regex` test case.
	* String splitting and joining (`str.split()` and `join()`) are used for the `split join` test case.

**Test users special JS feature or syntax:**

There is no explicit mention of any specialized JavaScript feature or syntax in this benchmark. However, the use of `%2B` as a replacement character may be specific to certain environments or use cases.

**Other alternatives:**

Other alternatives for replacing special characters in strings might include:

* Using a library like `string-escape` to escape special characters.
* Utilizing a more efficient string manipulation method, such as using a buffer or an array of characters.
* Implementing a custom replacement algorithm, potentially leveraging hardware acceleration.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach will depend on the specific requirements and constraints of your project. The benchmark is likely designed to compare the performance of these two approaches in general cases, but you may need to consider other factors when selecting an implementation for your own use case.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.182 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Regex	1454062.4 Ops/sec
split join	557484.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Split vs jin (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Regex vs split join

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Regex

split join

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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