Benchmark: regex test - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.1.0/jquery.min.js"></script>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="style.min.css" type="text/css">
<link rel="stylesheet" href="style.min.css" type="text/css">
<link rel="stylesheet" href="style.min.css" type="text/css">

Tests:

CharByChar
var r = "execute addBtsCertificatePkcs /rom/config/pkcs.p12 IamThePassPhrase anything could be here"; return r.replace(/[p][k][c][s][.][p][1][2][ ]*(.+)/g, " <pkcs12 details removed>");
Complete
var r = "execute addBtsCertificatePkcs /rom/config/pkcs.p12 IamThePassPhrase anything could be here"; return r.replace(/pkcs\.p12\s(.+)/g, "pkcs.p12 <password removed>");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
CharByChar
Complete

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: yesterday)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:132.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/132.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 132 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
CharByChar	13434253.0 Ops/sec
Complete	13403014.0 Ops/sec

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 and explore what's being tested on this provided JSON.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of two different approaches for regular expression replacement in JavaScript. The test cases are specifically crafted to evaluate the efficiency of character-by-character replacement versus complete string replacement.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code includes a link to jQuery library, which is loaded using the `script` tag. This suggests that the benchmark might be intended to run in a browser environment where jQuery is available. The additional links to CSS files (`style.min.css`) are likely used for styling purposes, but their impact on performance is minimal.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **CharByChar**: This test case uses the `replace()` method with a regular expression that performs character-by-character replacement. The regex pattern `\p[k][c][s][.][p][1][2][  ]*(.+)` matches any sequence of characters starting from the first character ( `[p]` ) to the last character ( `.+` ). The `g` flag at the end of the pattern enables global matching, which means the regex will replace all occurrences of the pattern in the string.

Pros:

* This approach might be more efficient for smaller strings or strings with a limited number of characters.
* It allows for incremental updates of the replacement process without requiring the entire string to be re-created.

Cons:

* For larger strings, this approach can lead to performance issues due to the overhead of iterating over each character individually.
* The regex pattern may not be optimal for performance, especially if it requires a lot of processing power to match and replace all occurrences.

2. **Complete**: This test case uses the same `replace()` method but with an optimized regex pattern: `/pkcs\.p12\s(.+)`. The differences between this pattern and the previous one are:

Pros:

* This approach is likely more efficient for larger strings, as it reduces the number of character-by-character replacements.
* It might be faster due to fewer computations involved in matching and replacing the entire string.

Cons:

* The optimized regex pattern relies on a specific format of the input data (`pkcs.p12 <password>`) which may not always match the expected input.
* If the replacement process is not carefully designed, this approach can still lead to performance issues if the regular expression requires excessive processing power.

**Library and Special JS Features**

The benchmark uses jQuery library for loading JavaScript files. This suggests that the test might be intended to run in a browser environment where jQuery is available.

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes used in the provided code snippets.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches could include:

1. Using a different string replacement method, such as `substring()` and concatenation.
2. Employing custom-made string processing algorithms for optimization.
3. Utilizing specialized libraries or modules designed for string manipulation and regex processing (e.g., RegEx-optimizer).
4. Optimizing the code using JavaScript-specific optimizations like `let` and `const`, caching, or memoization.

However, these alternatives may require additional considerations and modifications to accommodate the specific requirements of MeasureThat.net's microbenchmarks.

Related benchmarks:

regex test (version: 0)

Test

Comparing performance of: CharByChar vs Complete

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

CharByChar

Complete

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):