Benchmark: test regex vs regex vs includes

Script Preparation code:

var num = "1.899999999996"

Tests:

regex
/^\d+\.\d{3,}$/.test(num)
includes
num.includes('.')
regex2
/\.\d{3,}/.test(num)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
regex
includes
regex2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is defined as a JSON object with the following properties:

* `Name`: a unique name for the benchmark, which is "test regex vs regex vs includes" in this case.
* `Description`: an optional description of the benchmark, which is empty in this case.
* `Script Preparation Code` and `Html Preparation Code`: these are code snippets that are executed before running each test case. In this case, only `Script Preparation Code` is provided, which contains a simple JavaScript variable assignment: `var num = "1.899999999996";`.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of three individual test cases:

* **Test Case 1:** `/^\\d+\\.\\d{3,}$/.test(num)`
	+ Test Name: "regex"
	+ Purpose: This test case uses a regular expression to check if the string `num` matches a pattern that starts with one or more digits (`\d+`) followed by a decimal point (`\.`) and then three or more digits (`\\d{3,}`). The `test()` method returns `true` if the string matches the pattern, and `false` otherwise.
* **Test Case 2:** `num.includes('.')`
	+ Test Name: "includes"
	+ Purpose: This test case uses the `includes()` method to check if the string `num` contains a specific character or substring. In this case, it checks for the presence of a decimal point (`.`).
* **Test Case 3:** `/\\.\\d{3,}/.test(num)`
	+ Test Name: "regex2"
	+ Purpose: This test case uses another regular expression to check if the string `num` matches a pattern that consists of a literal decimal point (`\.`) followed by three or more digits (`\\d{3,}`). The `test()` method returns `true` if the string matches the pattern, and `false` otherwise.

**Comparison**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these three test cases:

1. **Regex** (Test Case 1): Uses a single regular expression to match a specific pattern.
2. **Includes** (Test Case 2): Uses the `includes()` method to check for a substring or character in the string.
3. **Regex2** (Test Case 3): Uses another regular expression with a slightly different pattern.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Regex**: Pros:
	+ Can be more flexible than other approaches.
	+ Can be faster for certain types of patterns.
Cons:
	+ Can be slower for complex or large patterns.
	+ May not be as readable or maintainable as other approaches.
* **Includes**: Pros:
	+ Simple and easy to understand.
Cons:
	+ Limited flexibility compared to regular expressions.
	+ May not be as efficient as regular expressions for certain types of patterns.
* **Regex2**: Pros:
	+ Similar performance characteristics to Regex.
Cons:
	+ Less flexible than Regex.
	+ May not be as readable or maintainable as Regex.

**Library and Special JS Features**

There are no libraries explicitly mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that the `includes()` method is a built-in JavaScript method, and regular expressions (`/regex/)`) are also a built-in feature of JavaScript.

If you were to test special JavaScript features or syntax, you would need to modify the benchmark definition to include those specific features. For example, if you wanted to test the performance of JavaScript's `Promise` API, you might add a new test case that uses promises and measures their execution time.

**Alternatives**

Some alternative approaches to measuring performance in JavaScript benchmarks might include:

* Using a different regular expression engine, such as RegExp.prototype.test() or RegExp.prototype.exec().
* Using a string matching library like String.prototype.matchAll() or Unicode property escapes.
* Using a custom implementation of the test cases using native code (e.g., C++ or Rust).
* Measuring performance in a more realistic scenario, such as measuring how long it takes to render a web page with multiple requests.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/122.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 122 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
regex	19444648.0 Ops/sec
includes	31569238.0 Ops/sec
regex2	19661262.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

test regex vs regex vs includes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: regex vs includes vs regex2

Created: 8 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

regex

includes

regex2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):