Benchmark: replace regex global vs replaceAll

Tests:

replace regex global
"010-1234-5678".replace(/-/g, "");
replaceAll
"010-1234-5678".replaceAll("-", "");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
replace regex global
replaceAll

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/97.0.4692.71 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 97 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
replace regex global	12317432.0 Ops/sec
replaceAll	8952836.0 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 benchmark and explain what is being tested, along with the pros and cons of different approaches.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two string replacement methods: `replace()` (with global flag) and `replaceAll()`. Both methods are used to replace hyphens (`-`) in a given input string with an empty string.

**Options Compared**

1. **`replace()` with global flag**: This method uses the `g` flag at the end of the regular expression to perform a global replacement, meaning all occurrences of the pattern are replaced.
2. **`replaceAll()`**: This method is not part of standard JavaScript, but rather a custom implementation often used in C-style languages like C or C++. It seems to be implemented as a wrapper around the `replace()` method.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **`replace()` with global flag**:
	* Pros: Easy to use, widely supported by modern browsers.
	* Cons: May have performance issues due to the need for multiple iterations over the string (once per occurrence).
2. **`replaceAll()`**:
	* Pros: Often faster than `replace()` due to caching or optimized implementation.
	* Cons: Less widely supported, as it's a custom implementation that may not be recognized by all browsers.

**Library and Custom Implementation**

In this case, the `replaceAll()` method is implemented as a wrapper around the standard JavaScript `replace()` method. This suggests that the custom implementation is trying to mimic the behavior of C-style `replaceAll()` functions.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There doesn't seem to be any special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. It's purely focused on comparing two string replacement methods.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to test alternative approaches, some options could include:

1. Using a different replacement method, such as `regex.replace()` with the `g` flag (a more modern and widely supported approach).
2. Testing performance using native JavaScript methods like `Array.prototype.map()` or `String.prototype.split()`.
3. Comparing the performance of custom implementations written in other languages, such as C++ or Rust.

Keep in mind that each alternative would require a separate benchmark setup and results interpretation.

I hope this explanation helps!

Related benchmarks:

replace regex global vs replaceAll (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: replace regex global vs replaceAll

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

replace regex global

replaceAll

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):