Benchmark: RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs equal operator

Script Preparation code:

var string = "Hello world!";
var regex = /Hello/;

Tests:

RegEx.test
regex.test(string);
String.includes
string.includes("Hello");
String.match
string.match("Hello");
equal operator
string === "Hello"

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
String.includes
String.match
equal operator

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks and explore what's being tested in this specific benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of four different ways to check if a string contains the substring "Hello":

1. `regex.test(string)`
2. `string.includes("Hello")`
3. `string.match("Hello")`
4. Using the equality operator (`string === "Hello"`)

**Options Being Compared**

Each option is compared in terms of its execution time, with the goal of identifying which one performs the best.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **`regex.test(string)`**: This method uses a regular expression engine to test if the string contains the substring "Hello". Pros:
	* Can be used for more complex pattern matching.
	* Can be optimized for performance with techniques like caching and memoization.
Cons:
	* May be slower than other methods due to the overhead of parsing regular expressions.
2. **`string.includes("Hello")`**: This method uses the `includes()` method, which checks if a string contains a specified value (in this case, "Hello"). Pros:
	* Fast and efficient, as it's implemented in native code.
Cons:
	* May not be suitable for complex pattern matching or multi-character substrings.
3. **`string.match("Hello")`**: This method uses the `match()` method, which attempts to find a regular expression match in a string. Pros:
	* Can be used for more complex pattern matching.
Cons:
	* May be slower than other methods due to the overhead of parsing regular expressions and attempting matches.
4. **`string === "Hello"`**: This method uses the equality operator to compare the string with the literal value "Hello". Pros:
	* Simple and easy to understand.
Cons:
	* May not be suitable for large strings, as it creates a new object reference.

**Library Used:**

None of these methods rely on external libraries. However, if we were to implement these methods using third-party libraries, `String.prototype.includes()` might use the `strrep` method from the Intl.Collator API or the `indexOf()` method, which is implemented in native code and is relatively fast.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**

None of these methods rely on special JavaScript features or syntax beyond what's standard. The benchmark focuses on comparing the performance of basic string comparison methods.

**Other Alternatives:**

If you need to optimize string matching or pattern searching, you might consider using libraries like:

1. `regex`: A popular library for regular expressions in Node.js.
2. `string-prompt**: A library that provides fast and efficient string operations, including includes() and matches().
3. `fast-regex`: Another library that provides optimized regex functionality.

Keep in mind that the performance of these alternatives will depend on the specific use case and requirements of your project.

**Conclusion:**

In this benchmark, we're comparing the performance of four basic methods for checking if a string contains the substring "Hello". By understanding the pros and cons of each approach, you can make informed decisions about which method to use in your own projects.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/108.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 108 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RegEx.test	6359108.0 Ops/sec
String.includes	13820908.0 Ops/sec
String.match	3347515.2 Ops/sec
equal operator	13945103.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs equal operator (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs String.includes vs String.match vs equal operator

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

String.match

equal operator

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):