Benchmark: Split join vs replace static

Script Preparation code:

var example = 'AgreementChangeId'

Tests:

split + join
var result = example.split('nt').join(' ');
replace
var result = example.replace('nt', ' $1')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
split + join
replace

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/92.0.4515.107 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 92 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
split + join	5427520.0 Ops/sec
replace	3589049.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

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

**Benchmark Definition**
The benchmark is defined by two test cases:

1. `split + join`
2. `replace`

Both tests involve manipulating a string variable called "example".

**Options Compared**

In this case, we have only two options being compared:

a. `split('nt')` followed by `join(' ')`: This approach involves splitting the input string into substrings separated by 'nt', and then joining the resulting substrings back together with a single space in between.

b. `replace('nt', ' $1')`: This approach involves replacing all occurrences of 'nt' in the input string with '$1'.

**Pros and Cons**

**Option (a): Split + Join**

Pros:

* Allows for flexible substring manipulation
* Can be used to split a string into multiple parts

Cons:

* May incur unnecessary overhead due to repeated splitting and joining operations
* Can lead to performance issues if the input string is large or contains many substrings

**Option (b): Replace**

Pros:

* Typically faster than splitting and joining, as it involves only a single pass through the input string
* Can be more efficient for large input strings or when dealing with many replacements

Cons:

* May not be suitable for cases where you need to split the input string into multiple parts
* The replacement string '$1' may require additional processing to extract the matched substring.

**Library and Special JS Features**

In this benchmark, no special JavaScript libraries or features are explicitly mentioned. However, it's worth noting that the `replace` function is a built-in method in JavaScript that can take an optional second argument (the replacement string) to specify how to replace the matched substring.

**Test Case Preparation Code**
The script preparation code provided for each test case is:

* `var example = 'AgreementChangeId'`: This sets the input variable "example" to a fixed string value.
* No HTML preparation code is provided, which suggests that these tests are designed to focus on JavaScript performance and don't require any additional setup or rendering.

**Other Alternatives**
If you were to modify this benchmark to compare different approaches, some potential alternatives could include:

* Using regular expressions instead of the `split` and `join` methods
* Implementing a custom substring replacement algorithm
* Comparing the performance of different string manipulation libraries or frameworks (e.g., jQuery's `replace()` method)

Keep in mind that these alternatives would require significant modifications to the benchmark code, and may not be suitable for all use cases.

Related benchmarks:

Split join vs replace static (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: split + join vs replace

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

split + join

replace

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):