Benchmark: fgdfgdfgdfgdfg - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

dsf
const korean = /[ㄱ-ㅎ|ㅏ-ㅣ|가-힣]/; if (korean.test(0)) { return 'korean'; }
sdfg
const korean = /[ㄱ-ㅎ|ㅏ-ㅣ|가-힣]/; if ((48 >= 0xac00 && 48 <= 0xd7a3) || (48 >= 0x1100 && 48 <= 0x11ff) || (48 >= 0x3130 && 48 <= 0x318f)) { return 'korean'; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
dsf
sdfg

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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/110.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 110 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
dsf	39201448.0 Ops/sec
sdfg	630632896.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of MeasureThat.net**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks, allowing developers to compare the performance of different approaches to various tasks.

**Benchmark Definition JSON Explanation**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark definition with the following fields:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark.
* `Description`: A brief description of the benchmark (not used in MeasureThat.net).
* `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`: These fields are not used in this specific benchmark. In general, they can be used to specify any code that needs to be executed before running the benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

The JSON also contains an array of individual test cases:

Each test case has two parts:

* `Benchmark Definition`: This is a JavaScript string that defines the test. It appears to contain regular expressions related to Korean characters.
* `Test Name`: A short name for the test.

Let's break down each test case:

1. **dsf**:
```javascript
const korean = /[ㄱ-ㅎ|ㅏ-ㅣ|가-힣]/;
if (korean.test(0)) {
  return 'korean';
}
```
This code defines a regular expression `korean` that matches Korean characters, and then checks if the test string `0` passes through this regex. If it does, it returns `'korean'`.

2. **sdfg**:
```javascript
const korean = /[ㄱ-ㅎ|ㅏ-ㅣ|가-힣]/;
if ((48 >= 0xac00 && 48 <= 0xd7a3) || (48 >= 0x1100 && 48 <= 0x11ff) || (48 >= 0x3130 && 48 <= 0x318f)) {
  return 'korean';
}
```
This code is similar to the first test case, but it uses a different approach. Instead of defining a regex and testing it on a specific string, it directly checks if the ASCII value `48` falls within certain Unicode ranges that correspond to Korean characters.

**Libraries Used**

In both test cases, the `const korean = ...` syntax is used to define a regular expression. The `/` characters indicate that this is a regex literal.

The `test()` method is also used in the first test case to check if the input string passes through the regex. This method is part of the JavaScript standard library and is not specific to any particular library.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There are no special features or syntaxes mentioned in these test cases, aside from regular expressions, which are a built-in feature of JavaScript.

**Other Considerations**

In general, benchmarking regular expression matching can be complex because of the many possible Unicode characters and their combinations. The two approaches used here have different strengths:

* The first approach (using `test()` on a specific string) is simple but may not cover all edge cases.
* The second approach (directly checking ASCII values within certain ranges) is more explicit but can be slower due to the overhead of the Unicode checks.

**Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches for benchmarking regular expression matching could include:

1. Using a regex engine like [regex-test](https://github.com/marcelofreire/regex-test), which provides more fine-grained control over the tests.
2. Writing custom JavaScript code to simulate different scenarios and measure their performance using tools like `performance.now()` or `console.time()`.
3. Using specialized libraries for benchmarking, such as [Benchmark.js](https://github.com/jedwright/benchmark-js), which provide a more structured approach to benchmarking.

These alternatives may be overkill for simple use cases like MeasureThat.net, but can provide more flexibility and accuracy in complex scenarios.

Related benchmarks:

fgdfgdfgdfgdfg (version: 1)

dfgdfg

Comparing performance of: dsf vs sdfg

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

dsf

sdfg

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):