Benchmark: gasgdsgdsg - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var string = "[12].Hello.world[2]";
var regex = /Hello/;

Tests:

RegEx.test
function getNestedProperty(key = "", object = {}) { return key .replace(/[\[\]\.]+/g, ' ') .trim() .split(' ') ?.reduce((acc, v) => acc?.[v], object); } getNestedProperty(string, {a: {b: 2}})
String.includes
function getNestedProperty(key = "", object = {}) { return key .match(/[ㄱ-힣a-zA-Z0-9]+/g) ?.reduce((acc, v) => acc?.[v], object); } getNestedProperty(string, {a: {b: 2}})
dshsdh352
function getKey(key) { let reuslt = ''; for (let i = 0; i < key.length; i++) { const k = key[i]; if (k === '[' || k === ']' || k === '.') { reuslt += ' '; } else { reuslt += k; } } return reuslt.split(' ').filter(x => x); } getKey(string)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
String.includes
dshsdh352

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/111.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 111 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RegEx.test	2167911.8 Ops/sec
String.includes	5766629.0 Ops/sec
dshsdh352	2369691.5 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, compared, and considered.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that provides information about the test case. In this case, it contains three test cases:

* `RegEx.test`: Tests the performance of regular expressions (regex) in JavaScript.
* `String.includes`: Tests the performance of the `includes()` method for strings in JavaScript.
* `dshsdh352`: A custom test case that appears to be testing a specific function (`getKey()`) with a regex pattern.

**Test Case Options**

There are three main options being compared:

1. **RegEx.test**: This test case uses regular expressions to extract a property from an object. The regex pattern is `Hello/`, which matches the string "Hello" (case-insensitive). The function calls `getNestedProperty()` with two arguments: `string` and an object `{a: {b: 2}}`.
	* Pros:
		+ This approach allows for precise control over the search criteria.
		+ Regular expressions can be used to match complex patterns.
	* Cons:
		+ Regular expressions can be computationally expensive, especially for large inputs.
		+ The pattern must be carefully crafted to avoid false positives or false negatives.
2. **String.includes**: This test case uses the `includes()` method to search for a substring within a string. In this case, the search is for "Hello" within the string `[12].Hello.world[2]`.
	* Pros:
		+ The `includes()` method is typically faster than regular expressions.
		+ It can be more straightforward to implement, especially for simple searches.
	* Cons:
		+ The search may not match exactly if the input string contains multiple occurrences of the target substring.
3. **dshsdh352**: This test case uses a custom function (`getKey()`) that attempts to extract the property from the `string` by iterating over its characters and building a new string with the matched properties separated by spaces.
	* Pros:
		+ This approach can be more straightforward than regular expressions, especially for simple cases.
	* Cons:
		+ The implementation may not cover all edge cases or corner cases correctly.

**Library Usage**

None of the test cases explicitly use any libraries, but the `getNestedProperty()` function in `RegEx.test` and the custom function `getKey()` in `dshsdh352` appear to be using JavaScript's built-in string manipulation methods (e.g., `replace()`, `match()`, `includes()`) and array indexing.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

The test cases do not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanations. However, the regular expression in `RegEx.test` does demonstrate basic regex concepts, such as pattern matching and escaping.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches for this benchmark might include:

* Using a dedicated regex testing library to simplify the implementation and improve performance.
* Implementing the search criteria using JavaScript's built-in array methods (e.g., `filter()`, `map()`) instead of custom functions or string manipulation methods.
* Adding additional test cases that cover more complex scenarios, such as searching for multiple patterns within a single input string.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not necessarily improve performance or accuracy, and the best approach will depend on the specific requirements and constraints of the benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

gasgdsgdsg (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs String.includes vs dshsdh352

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

dshsdh352

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):