Benchmark: RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match1

Script Preparation code:

var string = "Hello, world!";
var regex = /[,]/;

Tests:

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

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

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

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The test is designed to compare the performance of three different approaches for finding a substring in a string:

1. `String.includes()`
2. `RegExp.test()` (RegEx)
3. `String.match()` with a capturing group (`String.match()`)

**Approaches Compared**

Here's a brief overview of each approach and their characteristics:

### 1. `String.includes()`

`String.includes()` is a simple method that checks if a string contains another substring. It returns `true` if the substring is found, and `false` otherwise.

Pros: Simple, efficient, and widely supported.
Cons: Can be slower than other approaches for large substrings or complex searches.

### 2. `RegExp.test() (RegEx)`

`RegExp.test()` (or `RegEx.test()`) is a method that tests if a string matches a regular expression pattern. It returns an object with information about the match, including its index in the string.

Pros: Flexible and powerful for complex searches, but can be slower than other approaches.
Cons: Requires more code and can be overkill for simple substring searches.

### 3. `String.match()` with a capturing group (`String.match()`)`

`String.match()` is a method that finds the first match of a regular expression pattern in a string. When used with a capturing group, it returns an array containing the matched text and its index in the string.

Pros: Similar to `RegExp.test()`, but returns an array instead of an object.
Cons: Can be slower than other approaches for simple searches.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, none of the libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, `RegExp` is a built-in JavaScript library that provides regular expression functionality.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None are used in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to searching substrings in JavaScript include:

* Using a `for...loop` with indexing: `string.indexOf('Hello')`
* Using the `Array.prototype.indexOf()` method: `[string].indexOf('Hello')`
* Using other libraries like `jsregex` or `regexlib`

**Benchmark Test Cases**

The benchmark test cases are simple string literals that contain the substring to be searched for (`"Hello, world!"`). The test cases use different approaches:

1. `String.includes()`: `"string.includes("Hello");"`
2. `RegExp.test() (RegEx)`: `"regex.test(string);"`
3. `String.match()` with a capturing group: `"string.match("Hello")"`

**Benchmark Results**

The benchmark results show the execution count per second for each approach on a desktop Chrome 126 browser:

| Test Name | Executions Per Second |
| --- | --- |
| String.includes | 4697916.0 |
| RegEx.test (RegEx) | 10975197.0 |
| String.match | 2754317.75 |

The results suggest that `RegExp.test()` is the fastest approach, followed by `String.includes()`.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/126.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 126 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RegEx.test	4697916.0 Ops/sec
String.includes	10975197.0 Ops/sec
String.match	2754317.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match1 (version: 0)

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

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

String.match

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):