Benchmark: test replace - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

replaceAll
" 1 2 3 4 5 6 ".replaceAll(' ', '+')
replace regex
const r = / /g; " 1 2 3 4 5 6 ".replace(r, '+')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
replaceAll
replace regex

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and some of the considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test cases are designed to measure the performance of string replacement operations in JavaScript. There are two individual tests:

1. `replaceAll`: Replaces spaces (`' '`) with pluses (`'+'`) using the `.replace()` method.
2. `replace regex`: Uses a regular expression (`/ /g;`) to replace all occurrences of whitespace characters (including non-printable characters) with pluses (`'+'`).

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

* Using the `.replace()` method without any arguments (the default behavior, which likely relies on `RegExp` objects under the hood).
* Using a regular expression to replace whitespace characters explicitly.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **.replace() Method**:
	* Pros:
		+ Shorter and more concise code.
		+ May be faster due to built-in performance optimizations.
	* Cons:
		+ Less readable and maintainable, as the replacement logic is implicit.
		+ May rely on platform-specific behavior or implementation details.
2. **Regular Expression Approach**:
	* Pros:
		+ More explicit and readable code.
		+ Allows for fine-grained control over replacement rules (e.g., allowing or disallowing certain characters).
	* Cons:
		+ Potentially slower due to the overhead of compiling and executing regular expressions.
		+ May require more memory allocation.

**Other Considerations**

* **Platform and Browser Variability**: Both approaches may exhibit different behavior across platforms (e.g., Windows, macOS) or browsers (e.g., Chrome, Safari).
* **JavaScript Engine Internals**: The performance differences between the two approaches might be influenced by the specific JavaScript engine being used. Some engines might optimize one approach over the other.
* **Libraries and Frameworks**: If a library or framework is involved in the implementation of either test case (e.g., for handling whitespace characters), it could introduce additional variability.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, there is no explicit mention of any libraries being used beyond the standard JavaScript `RegExp` object. However, if the tests were implemented using frameworks like jQuery or React, those libraries might influence the results.

**Special JavaScript Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. The focus is solely on string replacement operations and the comparison of two different approaches.

Now, regarding alternatives:

* Other string replacement methods (e.g., `String.prototype.replace()` with a callback function).
* Using other libraries or frameworks for handling whitespace characters (e.g., jQuery's `trim()` method).
* Implementing custom regex patterns or optimization techniques.
* Using alternative programming languages or engines that might optimize string replacement operations differently.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/107.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 107 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
replaceAll	2790436.8 Ops/sec
replace regex	1334796.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test replace (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: replaceAll vs replace regex

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

replaceAll

replace regex

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):