Benchmark: RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.search (All case insensitive)

Script Preparation code:

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

Tests:

RegEx.test
regex.test(string);
String.includes
string.toLowerCase().includes("Hello".toLowerCase());
String.search with Regex
string.search(new RegExp("hello", 'i')) > -1

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
String.includes
String.search with Regex

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/113.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 113 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RegEx.test	8011949.5 Ops/sec
String.includes	18425578.0 Ops/sec
String.search with Regex	3820870.5 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.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three approaches for searching for a substring in a string:

1. `String.includes()`
2. `String.test()` with a regular expression
3. `String.search()` with a regular expression

These methods are used to find a specific word ("hello") within the input string ("Hello world!") regardless of case.

**Methods Compared**

Here's a brief overview of each method:

1. **`String.includes()`**: This method checks if a substring is present in a string, and returns `true` or `false`. It's case-insensitive by default.
2. **`String.test()` with regular expression**: This method uses the regular expression engine to test if a substring matches a pattern. The `/i` flag makes the search case-insensitive.
3. **`String.search()` with regular expression**: This method searches for the first occurrence of a substring in a string, using the same regular expression as above.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **`String.includes()`**:
	* Pros: Simple, easy to read, and generally fast.
	* Cons: May be slower than other methods for large strings or complex searches.
2. **`String.test()` with regular expression**:
	* Pros: Flexible, can handle more complex patterns, and may be faster than `includes()`.
	* Cons: Requires a regular expression pattern, which can be error-prone if not implemented correctly.
3. **`String.search()` with regular expression**:
	* Pros: Can search for an exact match, and is generally fast.
	* Cons: Only searches for the first occurrence, and may return incorrect results if the substring is not found.

**Library Usage**

None of the methods require a library or external dependencies.

**Special JavaScript Features**

The benchmark uses some special JavaScript features:

1. **Regular expressions**: The `/i` flag in `String.test()` and `String.search()` makes the search case-insensitive.
2. **Template literals**: The string literal `"Hello world!"` is a template literal, which allows for more readable and flexible string creation.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to test alternative approaches, you could consider:

1. Using `Array.prototype.indexOf()` instead of `String.includes()`.
2. Implementing a custom substring search function using JavaScript loops.
3. Comparing the performance of different JavaScript engines or platforms (e.g., Node.js vs. browser-based testing).

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be as relevant to this specific benchmark, which focuses on comparing three common string searching methods.

Related benchmarks:

RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.search (All case insensitive) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs String.includes vs String.search with Regex

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

String.search with Regex

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):