Benchmark: .includes() vs .test() vs .match() vs .indexOf() vs .search() fix

Script Preparation code:

var url = 'https://www.google.com/matchthis/other/args'

Tests:

text.includes()
url.includes('matchthis')
text.test()
/matchthis/.test(url)
text.match()
url.match(/matchthis/).length >= 0
text.indexOf()
url.indexOf('matchthis') >= 0
text.search()
url.search('matchthis') >= 0

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
text.includes()
text.test()
text.match()
text.indexOf()
text.search()

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 123 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
text.includes()	1568332800.0 Ops/sec
text.test()	28498808.0 Ops/sec
text.match()	12492502.0 Ops/sec
text.indexOf()	1625002752.0 Ops/sec
text.search()	19803168.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net is testing the performance of different string methods in JavaScript:

* `includes()`
* `test()`
* `match()`
* `indexOf()`
* `search()`

These methods are compared on the same input string "url" which contains a substring "matchthis".

**Options being compared:**

The options being compared are the performance of each method on the same input string. This allows users to compare and see which method is faster in different scenarios.

Here's a brief overview of each option:

* `includes()`: Returns `true` if the specified value is present in the string, otherwise returns `false`.
* `test()`: Returns `true` if the regular expression passed as an argument matches the specified string, otherwise returns `false`.
* `match()`: Returns an array of strings if the regular expression passed as an argument matches the specified string, otherwise returns `null`.
* `indexOf()`: Returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value in the string, or `-1` if it is not found.
* `search()`: Returns the index of the first occurrence of the specified value in the string, or `-1` if it is not found.

**Pros and Cons:**

Here's a brief overview of the pros and cons of each method:

* `includes()`: Pros - simple to use, efficient. Cons - may return false positives if the input string contains multiple occurrences of the substring.
* `test()`: Pros - flexible, can be used for regular expression matching. Cons - may be slower than `includes()` due to the overhead of regular expression compilation.
* `match()`: Pros - can be used for complex pattern matching. Cons - returns an array, which can be slower than returning a simple boolean value.
* `indexOf()`: Pros - efficient, can be used for exact string matching. Cons - may return `-1` if the substring is not found, and may require additional processing to handle false negatives.
* `search()`: Pros - similar to `indexOf()`, but with more flexibility in terms of regular expression support. Cons - similar to `indexOf()`.

**Library usage:**

None of the provided benchmarks use any external libraries or frameworks.

**Special JavaScript features or syntax:**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark, other than the standard methods being compared.

**Other alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternative string methods in JavaScript, some options include:

* `startsWith()`: Returns `true` if the string starts with the specified value.
* `endsWith()`: Returns `true` if the string ends with the specified value.
* `split()`: Splits the string into an array of substrings using a specified separator.
* `substr()` or `substring()`: Returns a subset of the string using a specified start and end index.

Keep in mind that the choice of string method depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

.includes() vs .test() vs .match() vs .indexOf() vs .search() fix (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: text.includes() vs text.test() vs text.match() vs text.indexOf() vs text.search()

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

text.includes()

text.test()

text.match()

text.indexOf()

text.search()

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):