ONE_REGEX = /^(?!.* $\s)[\w *()[\]'"/.&–-]+$/gm
(function (text) {
const SOME_OTHER_REGEX = /^(?!.* $\s)[\w *()[\]'"/.&–-]+$/gm;
SOME_OTHER_REGEX.test(text);
})('bla')
(function (text) {
ONE_REGEX.test(text);
})('bla')
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
inline defined | |
using one_regex |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
inline defined | 19693694.0 Ops/sec |
using one_regex | 4122908.8 Ops/sec |
Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases.
Benchmark Definition
The benchmark measures two approaches to defining regular expressions (regex) in JavaScript:
test
method call.ONE_REGEX
, is defined outside the function and used within the function.Options Compared
The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:
Pros and Cons of Each Approach
Library and Purpose
The RegExp
class is used in both test cases. The RegExp
constructor takes two arguments: a pattern string and an optional flags value. In this benchmark, the flags value is set to 'g'
, which enables global matching (i.e., matching all occurrences of the regex in the input string).
Special JS Feature/Syntax
None are mentioned or used explicitly in the provided test cases.
Other Alternatives
If you wanted to explore alternative approaches, consider these options:
RegExp.test()
directly, you could use String.prototype.replace()
with a callback function that takes a match array as an argument.regex
helper: If you need to perform complex regex operations frequently, consider using a utility library like Lodash, which provides a range of regex helpers.Benchmark Result
The benchmark results show the performance difference between the two approaches. The inline defined approach outperforms the "using one_regex" approach by a significant margin, likely due to the overhead of creating and storing the ONE_REGEX
variable.