Benchmark: String.split(regExp) vs String.split(string)

Script Preparation code:

var text = "Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book. It has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting, remaining essentially unchanged. It was popularised in the 1960s with the release of Letraset sheets containing Lorem Ipsum passages, and more recently with desktop publishing software like Aldus PageMaker including versions of Lorem Ipsum."

Tests:

Using RegExp
text.split(/Lorem/)
Using raw string
text.split('Lorem')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Using RegExp
Using raw string

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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net!

The provided benchmark is comparing two approaches for splitting a string: using regular expressions (RegExp) and using raw strings.

**What are we testing?**

We're testing how fast these two methods perform when splitting a long string containing the word "Lorem". The first test case uses a RegExp with the pattern "/Lorem/", while the second test case uses a raw string with the literal value "Lorem".

**Options compared:**

1. **RegExp**: This approach uses a regular expression to match the substring. It's more flexible and powerful, but can be slower due to the additional overhead of compiling and executing the RegExp.
2. **Raw String**: This approach uses a literal string without any special characters or escaping. It's simpler and faster, as it avoids the overhead of parsing and compiling a RegExp.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **RegExp**:
	+ Pros:
		- More flexible and powerful
		- Can handle complex patterns and substitutions
	+ Cons:
		- Slower due to additional overhead
		- Requires more effort to write and maintain
* **Raw String**:
	+ Pros:
		- Faster, as it avoids additional overhead
		- Simpler and easier to use
	+ Cons:
		- Less flexible and powerful
		- Can only match literal substrings

**Library usage:**

In this benchmark, no specific library is used. However, if a library were used, it could potentially impact the performance of the RegExp approach.

**Special JavaScript feature or syntax:**

The benchmark uses the `RegExp` constructor to create the RegExp object, which is a built-in function in JavaScript. It also uses the `/` character as a delimiter for the raw string pattern, which is a common convention.

**Other alternatives:**

If we were to consider other approaches, we might look at:

1. **Using an array method**: Instead of using `split()`, we could use an array method like `Array.prototype.reduce()` or `Array.prototype.filter()` to achieve the same result.
2. **Using a native JavaScript function**: Depending on the specific requirements, there might be other native JavaScript functions that can achieve the same result as `split()`.
3. **Using a library-specific function**: If we were using a specific library like Lodash or Ramda, they might provide their own implementation of string splitting.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would likely have different performance characteristics and trade-offs compared to the original approach used in this benchmark.

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/92.0.4515.159 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 92 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Using RegExp	805139.6 Ops/sec
Using raw string	1616512.4 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

String.split(regExp) vs String.split(string) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Using RegExp vs Using raw string

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Using RegExp

Using raw string

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):