Benchmark: Custom replacement in string

Tests:

replace regex
"this is it".replace(/i/g, "o");
replace All
"this is it".replaceAll("i", "o");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
replace regex
replace All

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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 its components.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided `Json` contains two benchmark definitions:

1. `"this is it"`.replace(/i/g, "o");`
2. `"this is it"`.replaceAll("i", "o");

Both benchmarks aim to measure the performance of string replacement operations in JavaScript.

**String Replacement Options**

Two options are compared:

1. `replace()` method: This method is a built-in method in JavaScript that replaces occurrences of a pattern with a specified replacement string.
2. `replaceAll()` method (not native): This method is not a standard JavaScript method, but rather a polyfill that mimics the behavior of `String.prototype.replaceAll()`. The `replaceAll()` method is not available in all browsers.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **replace() method:**
	* Pros:
		+ Widely supported across most browsers.
		+ Simple and concise syntax.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower than polyfills or custom implementations, especially for large strings.
2. **replaceAll() method (polyfill):**
	* Pros:
		+ May perform better than `replace()` for certain use cases due to its implementation optimization.
	* Cons:
		+ Not available in all browsers and may not behave exactly as intended.

**Considerations**

The choice of string replacement method can impact performance, especially when dealing with large strings or high execution counts. In this benchmark, the difference between `replace()` and `replaceAll()` is likely to be noticeable due to the use of a polyfill for the latter.

**Library/Custom Feature**

Neither benchmark uses any libraries, but it's worth noting that some browsers may have built-in support for `replaceAll()` or similar methods.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

In theory, other string replacement methods could be used, such as:

1. Using regular expression engines like V8 (in Chrome) or SpiderMonkey (in Firefox).
2. Implementing a custom string replacement algorithm.
3. Utilizing browser-specific APIs for string manipulation, if available.

However, the `replace()` and `replaceAll()` methods are widely supported and likely to be the most efficient choices in this benchmark.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 hours ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 131 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
replace regex	2297646.8 Ops/sec
replace All	2176434.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Custom replacement in string (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: replace regex vs replace All

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

replace regex

replace All

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):