Benchmark: Unnecessary non-capturing groups

Script Preparation code:

var loremString = "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum."
var unneededNonCaptureRE = /(?:z)+/
var noNonCaptureRE = /z+/
var anotherUnneededNonCapture = /lab(?:o)rum/
var anotherNoNonCapture = /laborum/

Tests:

unneededNonCaptureRE
unneededNonCaptureRE.lastIndex = 0 unneededNonCaptureRE.exec(loremString)
noNonCaptureRE
noNonCaptureRE.lastIndex = 0 noNonCaptureRE.exec(loremString)
anotherUnneededNonCapture
anotherUnneededNonCapture.lastIndex = 0 anotherUnneededNonCapture.exec(loremString)
anotherNoNonCapture
anotherNoNonCapture.lastIndex = 0 anotherNoNonCapture.exec(loremString)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
unneededNonCaptureRE
noNonCaptureRE
anotherUnneededNonCapture
anotherNoNonCapture

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing the performance of different regular expression (regex) patterns in JavaScript. The specific pattern being tested is related to capturing groups, which are used to capture parts of a string that match a certain pattern.

There are two main regex patterns being compared:

1. `unneededNonCaptureRE`: This pattern uses a non-capturing group (`(?:`) to avoid capturing the entire match.
2. `noNonCaptureRE`: This pattern does not use any grouping at all, it simply matches the string with the `z` character.

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two patterns in different test cases:

* `anotherUnneededNonCapture`: This pattern uses a non-capturing group similar to `unneededNonCaptureRE`, but with some additional characters.
* `anotherNoNonCapture`: This pattern does not use any grouping, it simply matches the string with the `laborum` substring.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two different approaches:

1. **Using non-capturing groups**: By using a non-capturing group (`(?:`) in the regex pattern, the engine can avoid capturing the entire match and instead only capture the matched part.
2. **Not using grouping**: The second pattern does not use any grouping, which means the engine will try to match the entire string from start to end.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Using non-capturing groups**:
	+ Pros: Can improve performance by reducing the amount of work needed to process the regex.
	+ Cons: May be less readable for some developers who are not familiar with this technique.
* **Not using grouping**:
	+ Pros: Can be more readable and easier to maintain, as it avoids the use of special characters.
	+ Cons: May be slower than using non-capturing groups due to the additional processing required.

**Library Used**

The `exec()` method used in the benchmark is a part of the JavaScript RegExp object. The RegExp object represents a regular expression pattern and provides methods for searching, matching, and replacing text.

In this case, the RegExp object is used with the `exec()` method to execute the regex pattern on the input string `loremString`. The `lastIndex` property is used to reset the index of the last match before executing the regex again.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It's a straightforward test of the performance difference between using non-capturing groups and not using grouping in regular expressions.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in alternative approaches, here are some options:

* **Using lazy matching**: Instead of using non-capturing groups, you could use lazy matching (`?`) to reduce the amount of work needed to process the regex.
* **Using a different regex engine**: Some JavaScript engines have different optimizations for regular expressions. For example, V8 (used by Chrome) has better support for regular expression performance compared to SpiderMonkey (used by Firefox).
* **Using a caching mechanism**: If you're running this benchmark repeatedly, you could consider implementing a caching mechanism to store the results of previous runs and avoid re-running the same tests multiple times.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not directly affect the performance difference between using non-capturing groups and not using grouping.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:95.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/95.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 95 on Ubuntu

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
unneededNonCaptureRE	2084003.0 Ops/sec
noNonCaptureRE	2246493.8 Ops/sec
anotherUnneededNonCapture	3582986.2 Ops/sec
anotherNoNonCapture	2785470.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Unnecessary non-capturing groups (version: 0)

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45291700/javascript-regex-non-capture-faster-than-no-parenthesis-at-all

Comparing performance of: unneededNonCaptureRE vs noNonCaptureRE vs anotherUnneededNonCapture vs anotherNoNonCapture

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

unneededNonCaptureRE

noNonCaptureRE

anotherUnneededNonCapture

anotherNoNonCapture

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):