Benchmark: RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs String.startsWith vs String.localeCompare vs String ===

Script Preparation code:

var string = "hello world!";
var string2 = "Hello World!"; 
var regex = /Hello World!/i;

Tests:

regex.test
regex.test(string);
string.match
string.match(string2);
string.includes
string.toUpperCase().includes(string2.toUpperCase());
string.startsWith
string.toUpperCase().startsWith(string2.toUpperCase());
String.localeCompare
string.localeCompare(string2, undefined, { sensitivity: 'base' });
String ===
string.toUpperCase() === string2.toUpperCase()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
regex.test
string.match
string.includes
string.startsWith
String.localeCompare
String ===

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 on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares six different string comparison methods in JavaScript:

1. `regex.test()`
2. `string.match()`
3. `string.includes()`
4. `string.startsWith()`
5. `String.localeCompare()`
6. `String ===` (strict equality)

Each test case measures the execution time of a specific string comparison method.

**Options Compared**

The options being compared are:

* `regex.test()`: Tests if the given regular expression matches the input string.
* `string.match()`: Returns an array containing match information for the first match in the input string.
* `string.includes()`: Checks if the input string includes the specified substring.
* `string.startsWith()`: Checks if the input string starts with the specified substring.
* `String.localeCompare()`: Compares two strings lexicographically, taking into account Unicode characters and locale-specific rules.
* `String ===` (strict equality): Compares two values for strict equality.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

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

1. **regex.test()**:
	* Pros: Fast and efficient for simple regular expressions, good for matching patterns.
	* Cons: May be slower for complex or longer strings, can be less accurate due to regex pitfalls.
2. **string.match()**:
	* Pros: Returns more information about the match (e.g., start and end indices), can be useful for parsing purposes.
	* Cons: May return an empty array if no match is found, can lead to unexpected behavior if not handled correctly.
3. **string.includes()**:
	* Pros: Simple and straightforward, works well for short strings or simple substrings.
	* Cons: Can be slow for longer strings or more complex searches, may return false positives due to substring matching.
4. **string.startsWith()**:
	* Pros: Fast and efficient for short prefixes, good for checking if a string begins with a specific value.
	* Cons: May not work correctly for Unicode characters or non-ASCII substrings, can lead to unexpected behavior if not handled correctly.
5. **String.localeCompare()**:
	* Pros: Takes into account Unicode characters and locale-specific rules, provides a more comprehensive comparison.
	* Cons: Can be slower due to its complexity, may return different results depending on the locale.
6. **String === (strict equality)**:
	* Pros: Fast and efficient for exact equality checks, good for primitive values or simple comparisons.
	* Cons: May not work correctly for objects, arrays, or complex data structures, can lead to unexpected behavior if not handled correctly.

**Library Used**

In the provided benchmark code, no specific libraries are imported. However, `String.prototype.localeCompare()` is a built-in method in modern JavaScript engines (ECMAScript 2019+).

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None of the test cases explicitly use special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanation.

**Other Alternatives**

For string comparison purposes, developers can consider using other approaches, such as:

1. `String.prototype.indexOf()` and `String.prototype.lastIndexOf()`: These methods find the index of a substring within a string.
2. `Array.prototype.includes()` (if working with arrays): This method checks if an array includes a specific value.
3. Custom implementation using bitwise operations or regular expressions.

However, these alternatives might not provide the same level of performance or accuracy as the built-in methods and regex patterns used in this benchmark.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/102.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 102 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
regex.test	38438772.0 Ops/sec
string.match	21627918.0 Ops/sec
string.includes	9266911.0 Ops/sec
string.startsWith	9087611.0 Ops/sec
String.localeCompare	440786.9 Ops/sec
String ===	1572251136.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

RegEx.test vs. String.includes vs. String.match vs String.startsWith vs String.localeCompare vs String === (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: regex.test vs string.match vs string.includes vs string.startsWith vs String.localeCompare vs String ===

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

regex.test

string.match

string.includes

string.startsWith

String.localeCompare

String ===

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):