Benchmark: RegEx.test vs.Split

Script Preparation code:

var string = "0-jordi.lopez-host";

Tests:

RegEx.test
string.replace(/^\d+-/, '')
String.includes
string.split('-',2)[1]

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
String.includes

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 explain what's being tested.

**Overview**
The benchmark compares two approaches to extract a specific string from a given input string:

1. Using regular expressions (RegEx)
2. Using the `split()` method with an array of separators

**Options Being Compared**

* **Regular Expressions (RegEx)**: The first approach uses the `string.replace()` method with a RegEx pattern (`/^\\d+-/`) to remove all leading digits followed by a hyphen.
* **String Split**: The second approach uses the `split()` method with an array of separators (`-`) to split the input string into two parts, and then extracts the second part (`[1]`).

**Pros and Cons**

* **RegEx Approach**:
	+ Pros: Highly flexible and powerful for pattern matching. Can be used for complex replacements.
	+ Cons: Performance may be slower due to the overhead of compiling and executing the RegEx pattern. May also have security implications if not properly validated.
* **String Split Approach**:
	+ Pros: Fast and simple, with a low overhead. Can be effective for basic splitting tasks.
	+ Cons: Limited flexibility, as it's designed specifically for splitting strings.

**Library Usage**
The benchmark uses the `string.replace()` method, which is part of the built-in JavaScript `String` prototype. This method performs a replacement operation on the string, replacing occurrences of the specified pattern with another value.

No external libraries are used in this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**
There's no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested here. The benchmark focuses on comparing two standard approaches to string manipulation.

**Other Alternatives**

* **Using `String.match()`**: Instead of using a RegEx pattern, you could use the `String.match()` method to extract matches from the input string.
* **Using a custom implementation**: You could also implement your own custom algorithm for extracting the desired string, potentially providing better performance or flexibility.

For reference, here are some examples of alternative approaches:

```javascript
// Using String.match()
var match = string.match(/^\\d+-/);
if (match) {
  var extractedString = string.substring(match.index + match[0].length);
}

// Custom implementation
function extractString(string) {
  var startIndex = 0;
  while (startIndex < string.length && !/^\d+-/.test(string[startIndex])) {
    startIndex++;
  }
  return string.substring(startIndex);
}
```

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics or trade-offs, and the benchmark results may vary depending on the specific implementation and input data.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/121.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/121.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 121 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RegEx.test	8014604.5 Ops/sec
String.includes	5411126.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

RegEx.test vs.Split (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs String.includes

Created: 9 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

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):