Benchmark: regex test vs ===

Script Preparation code:

const hey = 'true';

Tests:

regex
const hey = 'true'; /true/i.test(hey);
===
const hey = 'true'; hey === 'true';

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
regex
===

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the benchmark.

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches: using regular expressions (`/true/i.test(hey);`) versus using the equality operator (`===`).

**Approach 1: Using Regular Expressions**

In this approach, the code uses the `test()` method of a regular expression object to check if the string "true" matches the regex pattern `/^true$/i`. The `/^true$/i` pattern is a regex that matches only the literal string "true", ignoring case and matching at the start of the string. The `i` flag makes the match case-insensitive.

Pros:

* Can be used to check for exact matches, including non-string values (e.g., numbers, booleans).
* Can be used with various regex flavors that support lookaheads and lookbehinds.
* Can be more efficient than using the equality operator in some cases, especially when dealing with complex patterns.

Cons:

* Can be slower due to the overhead of compiling and executing regular expressions.
* Requires careful pattern design to avoid false positives or false negatives.
* May not be as readable or maintainable as other approaches, especially for simple checks.

**Approach 2: Using the Equality Operator (`===`)**

In this approach, the code directly compares two values using the `===` operator. This is a straightforward and well-established way to check if two values are equal.

Pros:

* Fast and efficient, since it's a simple comparison.
* Easy to read and maintain, as it uses a familiar syntax.
* Supports all types of data, including strings, numbers, booleans, and more.

Cons:

* May not be suitable for checking exact matches or equality with complex patterns.
* Can be less flexible than regular expressions, especially when dealing with non-string values.
* May lead to unexpected behavior if used incorrectly (e.g., comparing objects using `===`).

**Library Used: None**

The provided benchmark does not use any external libraries or frameworks.

**Special JS Features/Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. The code is written in standard ECMAScript syntax and uses only built-in functions and operators.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

* **String.prototype.includes()**: This method can be used to check if a string contains a specific substring or pattern.
* **RegExp.prototype.test() with different flags**: Experimenting with various regex flags (e.g., `m`, `g`, `u`) may provide alternative performance characteristics.
* **Function calls vs. inline expressions**: Using function calls versus inline expressions can affect performance, especially for simple checks.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your specific use case and requirements. This benchmark provides a starting point for comparing two common approaches to equality checking in JavaScript.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/94.0.4606.71 Safari/537.36 Edg/94.0.992.38

Browser/OS: Chrome 94 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
regex	42190756.0 Ops/sec
===	979783552.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

regex test vs === (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: regex vs ===

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

regex

===

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):