Benchmark: regex vs js - not Alphanumeric String

HTML Preparation code:

var string = "isAlphaNumeric091,";

Script Preparation code:

var string = "isAlphaNumeric091,";

Tests:

Regex
/^[a-z0-9]+$/i.test(string)
charCodeAt
function isAlphaNumeric(str) { for (let i = 0; i < str.length; i++) { let code = str.charCodeAt(i) if (!(code > 47 && code < 58) && // numeric (0-9) !(code > 64 && code < 91) && // upper alpha (A-Z) !(code > 96 && code < 123)) { // lower alpha (a-z) return false } } return true } isAlphaNumeric(string)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Regex
charCodeAt

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 JSON data and explain what is being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition specifies two test cases:

1. `regex`: This test case uses a regular expression to check if a string contains only alphanumeric characters (letters and numbers). The regular expression `/^[a-z0-9]+$/i.test(string)` checks the input string `string` for matches against this pattern.
2. `charCodeAt`: This test case manually checks each character in the input string using the `charCodeAt()` method to get the ASCII code of each character. It then checks if the code falls within the range of alphanumeric characters (47-57 for numbers, 64-90 for uppercase letters, and 96-122 for lowercase letters). If any character does not meet this condition, it returns `false`. Otherwise, it returns `true`.

**Comparison Options**

The two test cases are compared to measure which approach is faster:

* **Regex**: Uses a regular expression engine to check the input string. This approach can be more readable and easier to maintain than manual ASCII code checks.
* **charCodeAt**: Manually checks each character in the input string using the `charCodeAt()` method.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

**Regex**

Pros:

* Easier to read and maintain
* Can handle more complex patterns (e.g., non-alphanumeric characters)
* Often faster than manual ASCII code checks

Cons:

* May be slower for very long input strings due to the overhead of regular expression parsing
* May have performance issues with certain character sets or Unicode combinations

**charCodeAt**

Pros:

* Typically faster than regex for short to medium-length input strings
* More predictable and controlled, as it only checks ASCII codes

Cons:

* More difficult to read and maintain, especially for longer input strings
* Not suitable for handling non-ASCII characters or complex patterns

**Library Used**

The `charCodeAt()` test case uses the built-in JavaScript method `charCodeAt()`, which is a part of the ECMAScript standard.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark, other than regular expressions. The use of `i` at the end of the regex pattern `/^[a-z0-9]+$/i` makes it case-insensitive.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to test alternative approaches, some possible options could be:

* Using a different programming language (e.g., C++, Python) for manual ASCII code checks
* Using a more complex regular expression engine (e.g., `grep`, `sed`) for regex checks
* Testing other string validation algorithms (e.g., Unicode code point validation)
* Comparing the performance of regex engines from different vendors (e.g., JavaScript, Java, .NET)

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:120.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/120.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Regex	5713485.0 Ops/sec
charCodeAt	5159164.5 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

regex vs js - not Alphanumeric String (version: 0)

Check if a string only contains alpha-numeric characters.

Comparing performance of: Regex vs charCodeAt

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Regex

charCodeAt

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):