Benchmark: replaceAll vs replace CD

Tests:

replace
"ala ma kota, kot ma alę".replace(/ /g, "+");
replaceAll
"ala ma kota, kot ma alę".replaceAll(" ", "+");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
replace
replaceAll

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/100.0.4896.60 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 100 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
replace	1279317.4 Ops/sec
replaceAll	1082454.2 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark tests two different string replacement approaches: `replace` and `replaceAll`. Both methods are used to replace spaces (`\`) with double plus signs (`++`) in a given input string. The input string is: `"ala ma kota, kot ma alę"`. This test aims to compare the performance of these two methods.

**Options being compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. `replace`: A method that replaces all occurrences of a substring with another substring.
2. `replaceAll`: A method (not a built-in JavaScript method, but rather a regular expression-based implementation) that replaces all occurrences of a substring with another substring, similar to the `replace` method.

**Pros and Cons**

* `replace`:
	+ Pros: Simple and widely supported.
	+ Cons: May not be as efficient as `replaceAll`, especially for large strings.
* `replaceAll`: (Note: This is not a built-in JavaScript method. It's likely an implementation by the user, possibly using regular expressions.)
	+ Pros: Can potentially be more efficient than `replace` for certain use cases.
	+ Cons: May require additional setup and understanding of regular expression syntax.

**Library and purpose**

There is no library explicitly mentioned in the provided benchmark definition or test case. However, it's likely that the user has implemented a custom `replaceAll` method using JavaScript's built-in string methods (e.g., `replace()`, `indexOf()`, `slice()`) or regular expressions.

**Special JS features or syntax**

None are explicitly mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to implement your own replacement method, some alternatives to the `replace` and `replaceAll` methods could be:

* Using a library like jQuery's `.replaceWith()` method (not applicable here since it uses a different approach)
* Implementing a custom algorithm using JavaScript's built-in string methods (e.g., iterating over each character in the string)
* Using a regular expression-based implementation, similar to `replaceAll`

Keep in mind that the performance benefits of these alternatives depend on the specific use case and implementation details.

Related benchmarks:

replaceAll vs replace CD (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: replace vs replaceAll

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

replace

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):