Benchmark: Split join vs replace 2

Script Preparation code:

var example = 'AgreementChangeId'

Tests:

split + join
var result = example.split(/(?=[A-Z])/).join(' ');
replace
var result = example.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, ' $1')
Different regex split + join
var result = example.split(/([A-Z])/).join(' ');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
split + join
replace
Different regex split + join

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

This benchmark tests three different approaches to transforming the string "AgreementChangeId" into "Agreement Change Id".

**Options Compared:**

1. **`split + join`**: This approach uses the `split()` method to break the string into an array of words based on uppercase letters, and then the `join()` method to combine those words back together with a space separator.
   -  `example.split(/(?=[A-Z])/).join(' ');`

2. **`replace`**: This approach uses the `replace()` method with a regular expression to find all occurrences of uppercase letters and insert a space before each one.
    - `example.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, ' $1')`

3. **`Different regex split + join`**: This approach is very similar to the first method but uses a slightly different regex for splitting. It splits based on individual uppercase letters instead of at word boundaries.
   - `example.split(/([A-Z])/).join(' ');`

**Pros and Cons:**

* **`split + join`**: 
    * **Pros**: Often considered the most readable and straightforward approach.
    * **Cons**: Can be slightly less performant than `replace` in some cases due to the additional step of creating an array.

* **`replace`**:
    * **Pros**: Generally the most performant option due to fewer operations.  Can be more concise.
    * **Cons**: Can be less readable than `split + join`, especially for complex transformations.

* **`Different regex split + join`**: 
   * **Pros**: May have a slightly different performance profile compared to the other methods.
   * **Cons**: Less common and potentially harder to debug than the other two.

**Other Considerations:**

The choice of which method is best depends on the specific context and use case:

* **Readability**: If code readability is paramount, `split + join` might be preferable. 
* **Performance**: For highly performance-critical applications, `replace` would likely be the fastest option.

**Alternatives:**

* **Third-party Libraries**: Some JavaScript libraries offer specialized string manipulation functions that might be more efficient or feature-rich than these basic methods. However, using external libraries introduces potential dependencies and complexity.

Let me know if you have any other questions!

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 11_2_3) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/89.0.4389.90 Safari/537.36 Edg/89.0.774.57

Browser/OS: Chrome 89 on Mac OS X 11.2.3

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
split + join	1337765.1 Ops/sec
replace	801459.9 Ops/sec
Different regex split + join	1148689.1 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Split join vs replace 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: split + join vs replace vs Different regex split + join

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

split + join

replace

Different regex split + join

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated one month ago):