Benchmark: Comparing Regex To Split

Script Preparation code:

string = "jdbc:oracle:thin:@sanantonio-db-prd:5521:jman";
regex = "@([\\w-]+):([0-9]+):(\\w+)";

Tests:

Using Regex
string.match(regex);
Using Split
string.split('@')[1].split(':');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Using Regex
Using Split

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to parse a specific string: using regular expressions (Regex) and using the `split()` method with an array expression.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines:

1. A variable `string` that holds a predefined string containing a JDBC connection URL.
2. A variable `regex` that defines a Regex pattern to match against. The pattern `@([\\\\w-]+):([0-9]+):(\\\\w+)` breaks down as follows:
	* `@`: matches the literal `@` character
	* `([\\\\w-]+)`: captures one or more characters that are word characters (letters, numbers, or underscores), escaped with a backslash (`\\`)
	* `:`: matches the literal `:` character
	* `([0-9]+)`: captures one or more digits
	* `(\\\\w+)`: captures one or more characters that are word characters (letters, numbers, or underscores), escaped with a backslash (`\\`)

**Html Preparation Code**

There is no HTML preparation code provided.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark defines two test cases:

1. "Using Regex"
	* The `Benchmark Definition` script executes the `string.match(regex)` method.
2. "Using Split"
	* The `Benchmark Definition` script executes the expression `string.split('@')[1].split(':')`.

**Library and Purpose**

Neither of these test cases uses a library, as they are built-in JavaScript methods.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require additional explanation.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. Using Regex:
	* Pros:
		+ Can be more flexible and powerful for complex parsing tasks
		+ Can handle irregularities and variations in input data
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower than other methods due to the overhead of compiling a regular expression
		+ More prone to errors if the Regex pattern is not well-designed
2. Using Split:
	* Pros:
		+ Generally faster than Regex for simple parsing tasks
		+ Less error-prone, as it's harder to misinterpret input data with split()
	* Cons:
		+ Limited flexibility and power compared to Regex
		+ May require manual tweaking of the split() expression to achieve desired results

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to parse strings in JavaScript, some alternative approaches might include:

1. Using a dedicated parsing library like `js-parsing` or `regex-trie`.
2. Employing more advanced techniques like template literals, string concatenation, or using the `replace()` method with a callback function.
3. Utilizing specialized libraries for specific use cases, such as regular expression processing (e.g., `regex-js`) or string manipulation (e.g., `string-parsing`).

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

I hope this explanation helps you understand the benchmark and its underlying mechanisms!

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.16; rv:86.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/86.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 86 on Mac OS X 10.16

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Using Regex	5198348.0 Ops/sec
Using Split	4251624.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Comparing Regex To Split (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Using Regex vs Using Split

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Using Regex

Using Split

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):