Benchmark: Regex vs split/join quotes

Script Preparation code:

var str = '[\"padre\",\"nonno\",\"nonna\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"madre\",\"nonno madre\",\"nonna madre\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\",\"?\"]';

Tests:

Regex
str.replace(/\\"/g, '"')
Split and Join
str.split('\\"').join('"');

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Regex
Split and Join

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and analyze the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing two approaches to replace double quotes in a string: using regular expressions (`Regex`) and using `split()` and `join()` functions.

The test case uses a JavaScript string that contains several double-quoted substrings, such as `"padre"`, `"nonno"`, etc. The goal is to measure which approach (Regular Expressions or `split()`/`join()`) is faster in terms of number of executions per second.

**Options being compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Regex**: This option uses a regular expression to replace double quotes in the string. Regular expressions are a powerful way to match patterns in strings, but they can be slower than other approaches for simple string manipulation tasks.
2. **Split and Join**: This option uses the `split()` function to split the string into substrings separated by double quotes, and then uses the `join()` function to concatenate these substrings back together with double quotes.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

1. **Regex**
	* Pros: Regular expressions can be very powerful and flexible for matching complex patterns in strings.
	* Cons: Regular expressions can be slower than other approaches because they require more processing power to parse the pattern and match it against the input string.
2. **Split and Join**
	* Pros: The `split()`/`join()` approach is often faster than regular expressions for simple string manipulation tasks like this one, since it avoids the overhead of parsing a pattern.
	* Cons: This approach can be less flexible than regular expressions if you need to match complex patterns in your input strings.

**Library used**

In this benchmark, no libraries are explicitly mentioned. However, the `split()` and `join()` functions are built-in JavaScript methods that do not require any external libraries.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The regular expression used in the "Regex" test case is a simple one that does not rely on any advanced features of JavaScript.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring other approaches to replace double quotes in a string, here are a few alternatives:

* Using `String.prototype.replace()` with a callback function: `str.replace(/"/g, (match) => match)`
* Using `String.prototype.replaceAll()` (available in some JavaScript engines): `str.replaceAll(/"/g, '')`
* Using a custom implementation of the replacement logic using bitwise operations or other low-level techniques.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be as efficient or readable as the original `split()`/`join()` approach, and should only be considered if you have specific requirements or constraints that make them necessary.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 7.0; SM-J710F Build/NRD90M) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/65.0.3325.109 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome Mobile 65 on Android 7.0

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Regex	409219.2 Ops/sec
Split and Join	471168.7 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

Regex vs split/join quotes (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Regex vs Split and Join

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Regex

Split and Join

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):