Benchmark: test startsWith vs IndexOf

Tests:

startWith
let test = "temp_1234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz" test.startsWith("temp_")
indexOf
let test = "temp_1234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz" test.indexOf("temp_")

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
startWith
indexOf

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The test compares two string methods in JavaScript:

1. `startsWith()`
2. `indexOf()`

Both tests create a sample string `test` with a specific pattern (`"temp_1234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz"`). The goal is to measure the performance of these two methods when searching for a substring within the original string.

**Options compared**

The options being compared are:

1. `startsWith()`: Returns `true` if the string starts with the specified value, otherwise returns `false`.
2. `indexOf()`: Returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value in the string, or `-1` if not found.

**Pros and cons of each approach**

Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages:

* `startsWith()`:
	+ Pros: More concise, easier to read, and less likely to introduce errors due to off-by-one indexing.
	+ Cons: May be slower than `indexOf()` for very long strings or when searching from the start of the string.
* `indexOf()`: 
	+ Pros: Can handle longer substrings and is generally faster for large strings.
	+ Cons: Returns an index, which might require additional processing to extract the desired substring.

**Library usage**

There is no explicit library mentioned in the benchmark. However, both methods are part of the JavaScript standard library.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

Neither `startsWith()` nor `indexOf()` use any special or advanced JavaScript features.

**Other alternatives**

For string manipulation and searching, other alternatives exist:

1. Regular expressions (RegEx): Can be more powerful for complex patterns but may be slower.
2. String methods like `includes()`, which returns a boolean indicating whether the string contains the specified value.
3. Library-based solutions using third-party libraries like Lodash or Ramda.

**Benchmark preparation code**

The provided benchmark preparation code is empty, suggesting that the focus is solely on comparing the performance of `startsWith()` and `indexOf()` without any additional setup or dependencies.

**Test cases**

Each test case consists of a single benchmark definition with either `startWith()` or `indexOf()`. The script prepares a sample string and then executes the method being tested.

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/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/16.6 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 16 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
startWith	26598778.0 Ops/sec
indexOf	26626112.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test startsWith vs IndexOf (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: startWith vs indexOf

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

startWith

indexOf

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):