Benchmark: regexp vs split 6

Script Preparation code:

var fullAppName = 'vendor.appname@10.9.8'


function eatUntil(stopChar, str) {
  let result = ''
  for (let i = 0, len = str.length; i < len; i++) {
    if (str[i] === stopChar) break
    result += str[i]
  }
  return [result, str.slice(result.length + 1)]
}

Tests:

regexp
const splitAppName = /[^@.]+/g const [vendor] = splitAppName.exec(fullAppName) || [null] const [name] = splitAppName.exec(fullAppName) || [null] const [major] = splitAppName.exec(fullAppName) || [null]
split
const [fullName, version] = fullAppName.split('@', 2) const [major] = version.split('.', 1) const [vendor, name] = fullName.split('.', 2)
manual method
const [appName, version] = eatUntil('@', fullAppName); const [vendor, name] = eatUntil('.', appName); const [major] = eatUntil('.', version);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
regexp
split
manual method

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/87.0.4280.88 Safari/537.36 Edg/87.0.664.60

Browser/OS: Chrome 87 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
regexp	2667251.8 Ops/sec
split	1243174.4 Ops/sec
manual method	1638565.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into explaining the provided benchmark and its various aspects.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three approaches for parsing a specific string: regular expressions (`regexp`), string splitting with `split()`, and a custom "manual method" using the `eatUntil()` function. The benchmark aims to measure which approach is faster, allowing users to optimize their code for better performance.

**Options Compared**

The two main options being compared are:

1. **Regular Expressions (`regexp`)**
2. **String Splitting with `split()`**

Both approaches have pros and cons:

* **Regular Expressions (`regexp`)**:
	+ Pros: Can be very powerful and flexible, often used for complex text processing tasks.
	+ Cons: Can be slow due to the overhead of compiling the regular expression pattern, and may not always match what the developer intends (known as "backtracking").
* **String Splitting with `split()`**:
	+ Pros: Fast, lightweight, and easy to use. It's also a standard JavaScript method.
	+ Cons: May not be suitable for complex text processing tasks or cases where multiple separators need to be considered.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following:

* **Complexity of the input string**: If the input string contains many separators or is very long, string splitting with `split()` might be a better choice. However, if the string has only one separator and is relatively short, regular expressions might be faster.
* **Code readability and maintainability**: Regular expressions can make code harder to read and understand, especially for developers without experience working with them. String splitting with `split()`, on the other hand, tends to produce cleaner and more readable code.

**Library**

The `eatUntil()` function is not a built-in JavaScript library but rather a custom implementation used in the manual method test case. It's designed to mimic the behavior of regular expressions, allowing users to extract substrings from a given string up to a specified character (stopChar).

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark that would require specific knowledge or expertise.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines two functions: `eatUntil()`, which is used in the manual method test case, and `fullAppName`, which contains the string to be parsed. The script also sets up a variable for storing the full app name, which will be used across multiple test cases.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are three test cases:

1. **`regexp`**: Uses regular expressions to extract the vendor and name from the `fullAppName` string.
2. **`split`**: Uses string splitting with `split()` to extract the vendor and name from the `fullAppName` string.
3. **`manual method`**: Uses the custom `eatUntil()` function to extract the vendor, name, and major version from the `fullAppName` string.

**Latest Benchmark Result**

The latest benchmark result shows the number of executions per second for each test case on a desktop platform with Chrome 87. The results indicate that:

* Regular expressions (`regexp`) are the fastest.
* Manual method using `eatUntil()` is slower than regular expressions but faster than string splitting with `split()`.
* String splitting with `split()` is the slowest option.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to parsing strings, consider the following:

* **`match()`**: Similar to regular expressions, but uses a more straightforward syntax and doesn't require compiling patterns.
* **`Array.prototype.map()`**: Can be used with string methods like `split()` or `replace()` to create new arrays based on string manipulations.
* **Custom parsing functions**: Depending on your specific use case, you might consider implementing a custom parsing function that's optimized for your specific requirements.

Related benchmarks:

regexp vs split 6 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: regexp vs split vs manual method

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

regexp

split

manual method

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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