Benchmark: Simple Regex 2 - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

const urls = [
"/v1/tron/instruments/PVCM/composition",
"/v1/tron/instruments/Otro/composition",
"/v1/tron/instruments/Serabe/composition",
"/v1/tron/instruments/PVCM/compositon",
];

const results = ['PVCM', 'Otro', 'Serabe', false];

Tests:

String handling
const urls = [ "/v1/tron/instruments/PVCM/composition", "/v1/tron/instruments/Otro/composition", "/v1/tron/instruments/Serabe/composition", "/v1/tron/instruments/PVCM/compositon", ]; const results = ['PVCM', 'Otro', 'Serabe', false]; const extractSegment = (url) => { if (!url.startsWith('/v1/tron/instruments/')) { return false; } if (!url.endsWith('/composition')) { return false; } const fragment = url.substring('/v1/tron/instruments/'.length, url.length - '/composition'.length); if (fragment.includes('/')) { return false; } return fragment; } urls.forEach((url, idx) => { const fragment = extractSegment(url); if (fragment !== results[idx]) { throw `Mismatch #{fragment} #{results[idx]}`; } });
Simple Regex
const urls = [ "/v1/tron/instruments/PVCM/composition", "/v1/tron/instruments/Otro/composition", "/v1/tron/instruments/Serabe/composition", "/v1/tron/instruments/PVCM/compositon", ]; const results = ['PVCM', 'Otro', 'Serabe', false]; const regexp = new RegExp('\/v1\/tron\/instruments\/([^\]+)\/composition', "i") urls.forEach((url, idx) => { const match = url.match(regexp); if (typeof results[idx] === 'string') { if (match[1] !== results[idx]) { throw `Wrong #{match[1]} #{results[idx]}`; } } else if (results[idx] === false) { if (match !== null) { throw `Wrong, #{match} found`; } } });
Anchored Regex
const urls = [ "/v1/tron/instruments/PVCM/composition", "/v1/tron/instruments/Otro/composition", "/v1/tron/instruments/Serabe/composition", "/v1/tron/instruments/PVCM/compositon", ]; const results = ['PVCM', 'Otro', 'Serabe', false]; const regexp = new RegExp('^\/v1\/tron\/instruments\/([^\]+)\/composition$', "i") urls.forEach((url, idx) => { const match = url.match(regexp); if (typeof results[idx] === 'string') { if (match[1] !== results[idx]) { throw `Wrong #{match[1]} #{results[idx]}`; } } else if (results[idx] === false) { if (match !== null) { throw `Wrong, #{match} found`; } } });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String handling
Simple Regex
Anchored Regex

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_6) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/14.0.3 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 14 on Mac OS X 10.15.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
String handling	1672494.6 Ops/sec
Simple Regex	1112645.0 Ops/sec
Anchored Regex	1073544.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark and its test cases to help explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of JavaScript regex matching. The benchmark consists of three test cases: "String handling", "Simple Regex", and "Anchored Regex". Each test case uses a similar approach, but with slight variations in the regex pattern used.

**Test Case 1: "String handling"**

In this test case, the benchmark defines an array `urls` containing URLs with various formats. The script then iterates through the array, calling a function `extractSegment(url)` to extract a specific segment from each URL. If the extracted segment does not match the expected value in the `results` array, the script throws an error.

The regex pattern used is empty (`const regexp = new RegExp('')`). This means that no regex matching is performed; instead, the script relies solely on string manipulation to extract the desired segment.

**Pros and Cons:**

* Pros:
	+ Simple implementation
	+ Does not rely on regex parsing
* Cons:
	+ May be slower due to manual string manipulation

**Test Case 2: "Simple Regex"**

In this test case, the benchmark uses a similar approach as Test Case 1, but with a regex pattern (`const regexp = new RegExp('\\/v1\\/tron\\/instruments\\/([^\\]+)\\/composition', 'i')`). This pattern matches URLs starting with `/v1/tron/instruments/` followed by any characters except `/`, and ending with `/composition`.

**Pros and Cons:**

* Pros:
	+ Faster than manual string manipulation
	+ Uses regex for pattern matching
* Cons:
	+ May be slower due to regex parsing

**Test Case 3: "Anchored Regex"**

In this test case, the benchmark uses an anchored regex pattern (`const regexp = new RegExp('^\\/v1\\/tron\\/instruments\\/([^\\]+)\\/composition$', 'i')`). This pattern matches URLs starting with `/v1/tron/instruments/` followed by any characters except `/`, and ending with `/composition`.

**Pros and Cons:**

* Pros:
	+ Faster than non-anchored regex
	+ Uses regex for pattern matching
* Cons:
	+ May be slower on older browsers that don't support anchored regex

**Library Used:**

None of the test cases use a specific library beyond the built-in JavaScript `RegExp` class.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax:**

The benchmark does not specifically target any special JS feature or syntax. It relies solely on standard JavaScript features and libraries (e.g., `RegExp`, string manipulation).

**Alternatives:**

There are alternative ways to optimize regex matching, such as:

* Using a dedicated regex library like RegExp.js
* Optimizing the regex pattern for specific use cases
* Using a Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler or other performance optimization techniques

However, these alternatives may require additional setup and expertise.

Overall, the benchmark provides a good starting point to understand the performance characteristics of JavaScript regex matching.

Related benchmarks:

Simple Regex 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: String handling vs Simple Regex vs Anchored Regex

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

String handling

Simple Regex

Anchored Regex

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):