Benchmark: test benchmark 543

Tests:

substring
const a = "Omnipotent"; const pos = 3; "" + a.substring(0, pos) + "" + a.substring(pos);
replace
const a = "Omnipotent"; const sub = "Omn" a.replace(sub, "" + sub + "");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
substring
replace

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/81.0.4044.129 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 81 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
substring	48809524.0 Ops/sec
replace	6737930.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark data and explain what's being tested, compared, and its pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmarking process involves comparing different approaches for a specific task.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided Benchmark Definition JSON represents a test case:
```json
{
  "Name": "test benchmark 543",
  "Description": null,
  "Script Preparation Code": null,
  "Html Preparation Code": null
}
```
This JSON is empty, indicating that no script or HTML preparation code is required for this benchmark.

**Individual Test Cases**

Two test cases are provided:
```json
[
 {
 "Benchmark Definition": "const a = \"Omnipotent\";\r\nconst pos = 3;\r\n\"\" + a.substring(0, pos) + \"\" + a.substring(pos);",
 "Test Name": "substring"
 },
 {
 "Benchmark Definition": "const a = \"Omnipotent\";\r\nconst sub = \"Omn\"\r\na.replace(sub, \"\" + sub + \"\");",
 "Test Name": "replace"
 }
]
```
These test cases compare two approaches for inserting HTML markup around a specific substring in a string:

1. **Substring Approach** (`"substring"`):
```javascript
const a = "Omnipotent";
const pos = 3;
"<> + a.substring(0, pos) + <> + a.substring(pos);"
```
In this approach, the `substring()` method is used to extract two substrings from the original string. The resulting strings are then concatenated with HTML markup (``) using template literals.

Pros:

* Simple and straightforward implementation
* Easy to understand and maintain

Cons:

* May incur additional overhead due to the creation of intermediate strings
* Might not be optimized for performance

2. **Replace Approach** (`"replace"`):
```javascript
const a = "Omnipotent";
const sub = "Omn";
a.replace(sub, "" + sub + "");
```
In this approach, the `replace()` method is used to replace the specified substring with a new string that includes HTML markup. The original string remains unchanged.

Pros:

* May be more efficient since it modifies the original string in place
* Can avoid additional overhead due to intermediate string creation

Cons:

* May require additional memory allocation for the modified string
* Might not work as expected if the replacement substring is part of a larger string manipulation operation

**Library and Special JS Features**

No libraries are used in these test cases. However, JavaScript syntax features such as template literals (`"<> + ... + <>"`), string concatenation with HTML markup (`" " + str + ""`), and the `replace()` method are utilized.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for inserting HTML markup around a specific substring in a string might include:

* Using a regular expression to match and replace the substring
* Utilizing a library or framework that provides a built-in way to format strings with HTML markup
* Employing a different string manipulation technique, such as using `indexOf()` and `slice()` methods

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have their own trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, and maintainability.

Related benchmarks:

test benchmark 543 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: substring vs replace

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

substring

replace

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):