Benchmark: '==' vs test - MeasureThat.net

Tests:

test with ==
asnStatus = 'APPROVED'; if (!(asnStatus == 'APPROVED' || asnStatus == 'PARTIALLY_APPROVED')) console.log("tested with if")
test with test
asnStatus = 'APPROVED'; if (!(/^APPROVED$|^PARTIALLY_APPROVED/.test(asnStatus))) console.log("tested with test method")

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
test with ==
test with test

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/115.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 115 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
test with ==	7830365.5 Ops/sec
test with test	5637225.0 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 benchmark and analyze what's being tested.

**Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches for checking if a string matches a specific pattern: the `===` operator (equality with assignment) versus the `test()` method (using regular expressions).

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **`===` operator**: This operator checks if two values are equal using both value and type equality. In this case, it's used to check if the `asnStatus` variable matches either "APPROVED" or "PARTIALLY_APPROVED".
2. **`test()` method**: This method is used with regular expressions to search for a pattern in a string. In this case, it's used to check if the `asnStatus` variable matches the patterns "APPROVED" or "PARTIALLY_APPROVED".

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **`===` operator**:
	+ Pros: Simple, fast, and widely supported.
	+ Cons: Can be slower than regular expressions for complex pattern matching, may not handle Unicode characters correctly, and can lead to unexpected results if the variables are reassigned before comparison.
* **`test()` method**:
	+ Pros: More flexible and powerful than `===`, can handle complex patterns, and is more robust when dealing with Unicode characters. However, it's slower than `===` for simple pattern matching.
	+ Cons: Can be slower than `===` in general, may require more memory to store the regular expression.

**Library and Special JS Features**

In this benchmark, no specific JavaScript library is used beyond the built-in `test()` method for regular expressions. There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches that could be used to check if a string matches a pattern include:

* Using `String.prototype.match()`: This method returns an array containing the first match of the pattern, or null if no match is found.
* Using `String.prototype.replace()`: This method replaces occurrences of the pattern in the string with another value. By setting the replacement to an empty string, it can be used to test for matches.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The benchmark preparation code is not provided, but based on the benchmark definition and individual test cases, it appears that the script is simply assigning a value to `asnStatus` and then using one of the two comparison operators to check if it matches a specific pattern.

I hope this explanation helps!

Related benchmarks:

'==' vs test (version: 0)

benchmark to know performance of equating with '==' vs test method

Comparing performance of: test with == vs test with test

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

test with ==

test with test

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):