Benchmark: regex speed testing 4

Script Preparation code:

var h = '52.115.175.62';

Tests:

complex
/^\d+\.\d+\.\d+\.\d+$/.test(h);
plus
/^[0-9.]+$/.test(h);
extralong
/^(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[1]?[1-9][1-9]?)\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[1]?[1-9][1-9]?)\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[1]?[1-9][1-9]?)\.(25[0-5]|2[0-4][0-9]|[1]?[1-9][1-9]?)$/.test(h);
nonregex
h.split(".").map(i => Number(i) >= 0 && Number(i) <= 255).includes(false);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
complex
plus
extralong
nonregex

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/98.0.4758.80 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 98 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
complex	8839448.0 Ops/sec
plus	8638835.0 Ops/sec
extralong	7581747.0 Ops/sec
nonregex	748919.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The JSON object representing the benchmark definition contains several key points:

*   **Script Preparation Code**: This code snippet is executed before running any tests. It sets a variable `h` to a specific IP address string.
*   **Html Preparation Code**: There are no HTML-related preparation steps specified in this benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

The test cases compare different approaches to validate the IP address stored in the `h` variable:

1.  **complex**: This test uses a regular expression (`^\\d+\\.\\d+\\.\\d+\\.\\d+$`) to check if the entire string is a valid IPv4 address.
2.  **plus**: This test only checks if the string contains one or more digits and at least one dot (`^[0-9.]+$`).
3.  **extralong**: This test verifies that each part of the IP address (split by dots) falls within the range of 0 to 255 using a map function (`h.split(".".map(i => Number(i) >= 0 && Number(i) <= 255).includes(false)`).
4.  **nonregex**: This test uses a more complex validation approach that involves splitting the string, mapping each part to a number (which is not correct for an IP address), and then checking if any of these numbers are false (i.e., not valid).

**Comparison and Considerations**

The tests compare different aspects of IP address validation:

*   **complex**: This test ensures the entire IP address string matches the expected format.
*   **plus**: This test only checks for a minimal set of characters, which is not sufficient to validate an IP address.
*   **extralong**: This test verifies that each part of the IP address falls within the correct range, providing more comprehensive validation than the `complex` test.
*   **nonregex**: This test uses an incorrect approach and is likely intended for demonstration or educational purposes rather than actual use.

**Library Usage**

None of the tests explicitly use a library for regular expression matching or string manipulation. The regex patterns are hardcoded within the benchmark definition.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

There doesn't appear to be any specific JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. However, the use of arrow functions (`i => Number(i) >= 0 && Number(i) <= 255`) and template literals (`h.split(".".map(i => ...).includes(false)`)) is noteworthy.

**Alternative Approaches**

Some possible alternative approaches to validate IP addresses include:

*   Using a dedicated library like `ipaddr.js` for more accurate and efficient validation.
*   Implementing custom validation logic using JavaScript's built-in string manipulation functions (e.g., `indexOf()`, `substring()`).
*   Using regular expressions with more detailed rules, such as those provided by the [IPv4 address regex pattern](https://stackoverflow.com/a/383816/114768).

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be necessary for this specific benchmark, as it appears to be focused on demonstrating different validation approaches rather than optimizing performance or accuracy.

Related benchmarks:

regex speed testing 4 (version: 3)

Comparing performance of: complex vs plus vs extralong vs nonregex

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

complex

plus

extralong

nonregex

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):