Benchmark: new Url vs host RegEx vs extractDomain lib

Script Preparation code:

var e = ["/", ":", "?", "#"],
    t = [".", "/", "@"];

function extractDomain(n) {
    for (var i, u = 0, f = 0, s = 0, a = n.length, c = 0; a-- && ++c && !(u && e.indexOf(n[c]) > -1);) "." === n[c] && (++u, f = c);
    for (i = c, c = f; c--;)
        if (-1 !== t.indexOf(n[c])) {
            s = c + 1;
            break
        } if (0 === s && i > 3) return n;
    if (s > 0 && s < 2) return "";
    return n.slice(s, i)
}

Tests:

new URL
return new URL('https://is5-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple126/v4/00/33/2e/00332e58-b196-82cf-1231-82d81d6fe477/AppIcon_TikTok-0-0-1x_U007emarketing-0-0-0-7-0-0-sRGB-0-0-0-GLES2_U002c0-512MB-85-220-0-0.png/512x0w.png').origin;
RegEx
return 'https://is5-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple126/v4/00/33/2e/00332e58-b196-82cf-1231-82d81d6fe477/AppIcon_TikTok-0-0-1x_U007emarketing-0-0-0-7-0-0-sRGB-0-0-0-GLES2_U002c0-512MB-85-220-0-0.png/512x0w.png'.match(/((http|ftp|https):\/\/)?(([\w.-]*)\.([\w]*))/)[0]
extractDomain lib
return extractDomain('https://is5-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Purple126/v4/00/33/2e/00332e58-b196-82cf-1231-82d81d6fe477/AppIcon_TikTok-0-0-1x_U007emarketing-0-0-0-7-0-0-sRGB-0-0-0-GLES2_U002c0-512MB-85-220-0-0.png/512x0w.png')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
new URL
RegEx
extractDomain lib

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll provide an in-depth explanation of the benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test, specifically comparing three approaches to extract the domain from a given URL string:

1.  `new URL` method
2.  Regular Expression (RegEx) approach
3.  A custom library called "extractDomain" for domain extraction

**Options Compared**

Here's a breakdown of each option:

*   **New URL Method**: This approach uses the built-in `URL` class in JavaScript to create a new instance from the given URL string. The `origin` property of the resulting object contains the extracted domain.
*   **RegEx Approach**: This method uses a custom regular expression pattern to match and extract the domain from the URL string. The pattern is designed to capture various possible formats of URLs, including protocols, hostnames, and path parts.
*   **Extract Domain Library**: This approach leverages an external library (not included in the benchmark code) specifically designed for extracting domains from URLs. This method likely provides a more efficient and accurate way of domain extraction compared to the RegEx approach.

**Pros and Cons**

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

*   **New URL Method**:
    *   Pros: Fast, built-in API, and straightforward implementation.
    *   Cons: May not work correctly for all possible URL formats, as it relies on browser-specific features and may require additional parsing steps.

*   **RegEx Approach**:
    *   Pros: Highly flexible and adaptable to various URL formats, but its performance can be slower due to the overhead of regular expression compilation.
    *   Cons: May not handle certain edge cases or URL structures correctly, which could lead to incorrect results or errors.

*   **Extract Domain Library**:
    *   Pros: Likely to provide accurate and efficient domain extraction for a wide range of URLs, with the added benefit of being specifically designed for this purpose.
    *   Cons: Requires an external library, potentially introducing additional dependencies and complexity.

**Library Explanation**

The "extractDomain" library is not included in the benchmark code but can be assumed to be a specialized library providing optimized and accurate domain extraction functionality. This library would likely handle edge cases and complex URL formats more effectively than a custom RegEx approach, making it a suitable choice for this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the provided code snippets that require specific handling or consideration.

**Alternatives**

Some alternatives to these approaches could include:

*   **URL Parsing Libraries**: Specialized libraries like `url` (Node.js) or `uri` (Browser-based) can provide more accurate and efficient URL parsing and domain extraction functionality.
*   **Custom Implementations**: Depending on the specific requirements, developers might choose to implement their own custom algorithms for domain extraction, potentially leveraging existing libraries or expertise.

These alternatives should be considered when deciding which approach to use for a particular project, taking into account factors such as performance, accuracy, maintainability, and the trade-offs between these aspects.

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
new URL	671929.5 Ops/sec
RegEx	12279896.0 Ops/sec
extractDomain lib	1069392.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

new Url vs host RegEx vs extractDomain lib (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: new URL vs RegEx vs extractDomain lib

Created: one year ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

new URL

RegEx

extractDomain lib

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 29 days ago):