Benchmark: My Slice vs Regex

Script Preparation code:

let s = "abrakadabrA";

Tests:

Regex
let s = "abrakadabrA"; const [, v, t] = s.match(/^(.+?)(.)$/);
Slice
let s = "abrakadabrA"; const v = s.slice (0, -1), t = s.slice(-1);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Regex
Slice

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The `Script Preparation Code` defines two variables: `s` and its value is set to `"abrakadabrA"`. This variable will be used as input for the benchmark test cases.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Regex**: The benchmark definition uses a regular expression (`/^(.+?)(.)$/`) to extract two substrings from `s`: `v` and `t`.
	* Purpose: To measure the performance of using regular expressions for substring extraction.
2. **Slice**: The benchmark definition uses the `slice()` method to extract two substrings from `s`: `v` and `t`.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare:

1. Regular expression-based approach (Regex)
2. String slicing approach (Slice)

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Regular Expression-based Approach (Regex)**:
	* Pros:
		+ Can extract specific patterns from a string efficiently.
		+ Allows for more flexibility in terms of pattern matching.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be slower due to the overhead of regular expression parsing.
		+ May not perform well on large strings or complex patterns.
2. **String Slicing Approach (Slice)**:
	* Pros:
		+ Generally faster and more efficient than regular expressions.
		+ Can take advantage of caching and optimization techniques.
	* Cons:
		+ Limited to extracting substrings using a fixed length.
		+ May not be suitable for complex pattern matching.

**Other Considerations**

1. **Library Usage**: The benchmark uses the `match()` method, which is part of the JavaScript String prototype. This method returns an array containing matches and their corresponding full match information.
2. **Special JS Feature or Syntax**: There are no special features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Alternatives**

If you want to explore other approaches, you can consider:

1. Using a dedicated string processing library like `String.prototype.replace()` or `String.prototype.search()`.
2. Implementing custom substring extraction functions using bitwise operations or other low-level techniques.
3. Using a different data structure, such as an array or object, to represent the input string.

However, these alternatives are likely to be less efficient and may not provide significant performance improvements over the current benchmark results.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/103.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 103 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Regex	13697611.0 Ops/sec
Slice	944450240.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

My Slice vs Regex (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Regex vs Slice

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Regex

Slice

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):