var string = 'test the test {message} test test test test message test test message test test test test test test message'
var regExp = new RegExp('{message}');
var res = string.replace(regExp, '.')
var res = string.replace('{message}', '.');
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
replace by regex | |
replace via string |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
replace by regex | 30516674.0 Ops/sec |
replace via string | 38268836.0 Ops/sec |
The benchmark defined in the provided JSON compares two different methods of string replacement in JavaScript: using a regular expression (replace by regex
) and using a direct string literal (replace via string
). Specifically, it examines how efficiently each method performs within a given context.
replace by regex:
var res = string.replace(regExp, '.');
{message}
placeholder in the input string and replaces it with a dot (.
).replace via string:
var res = string.replace('{message}', '.');
{message}
substring in the input string with a dot (.
) without any regular expression processing.Pros:
{message}
was dynamic or involved varied formatting, regex could accommodate these needs through pattern definitions.Cons:
Pros:
Cons:
Based on the latest benchmark results:
replace via string
) achieved approximately 13,793,889 executions per second.replace by regex
) had a lower performance of around 11,238,374 executions per second.Consequently, the direct string replacement is faster than the regular expression approach in this particular scenario.
replaceAll
could be a consideration (though it still relies on a similar underlying mechanism).In conclusion, while both string replacement methods serve the same overall function, their suitability greatly depends on the specifics of the task, including complexity, performance requirements, and developer familiarity with toolsets like regular expressions.