Benchmark: ExtractTokens-stringreplace-vs-stringmatchall-vs-regexpexec

Tests:

string.replace
const name = 'Hello - {token1} {token2} {token3}'; const regexp = /\{(.*?)}/g; const tokens = []; name.replace(regexp, function(a, b) { tokens.push(b); });
string.matchAll
const name = 'Hello - {token1} {token2} {token3}'; const regexp = /\{(.*?)}/g; const tokens = Array.from(name.matchAll(regexp), (m) => m[1]);
regexp.exec
const name = 'Hello - {token1} {token2} {token3}'; const regexp = /\{(.*?)}/g; const tokens = []; let execResults; while ((execResults = regexp.exec(name)) !== null) { tokens.push(execResults[0]); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
string.replace
string.matchAll
regexp.exec

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks and explore what's being tested on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of three string processing approaches:

1. `string.replace`
2. `string.matchAll`
3. `regexp.exec`

These methods are used to extract tokens from a template string with placeholder syntax (`{token1}`, `{token2}`, etc.).

**Options Compared**

Each method has its own strengths and weaknesses:

* **`string.replace`**: This method is simple and efficient, but it can be less accurate than the other two options. It uses a callback function to process each match, which can lead to additional overhead.
	+ Pros: Easy to implement, fast
	+ Cons: Can be less accurate, may use more memory
* **`string.matchAll`**: This method returns an iterator that yields matches for all occurrences of the pattern in the string. It's a good option when you need to process multiple matches efficiently.
	+ Pros: Efficient, accurate
	+ Cons: May not be as simple to implement as `replace`
* **`regexp.exec`**: This method executes a regular expression and returns an array containing match information. It's similar to `string.matchAll`, but it can be more efficient for certain use cases.
	+ Pros: Efficient, flexible
	+ Cons: Requires knowledge of regular expressions, may not be as accurate as `matchAll`

**Library Used**

None of the methods require a specific library beyond what's built into JavaScript.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

No special features or syntax are required for these tests. The code uses standard JavaScript features and syntax.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these methods, consider the following factors:

* Accuracy: `string.matchAll` and `regexp.exec` are generally more accurate than `string.replace`.
* Performance: All three methods can be efficient, but `string.matchAll` and `regexp.exec` may have an edge in terms of performance.
* Complexity: `string.replace` is often the simplest option to implement.

**Alternatives**

If you need to optimize string processing in JavaScript, consider using:

* `String.prototype.replaceAll`: This method is similar to `string.replace`, but it's built into the language and may be faster.
* Custom regular expressions: If you need more complex pattern matching, consider using custom regular expressions instead of `regexp.exec`.
* Third-party libraries: Depending on your specific use case, a third-party library like regex-escape or string-processing libraries might provide additional functionality and optimization.

In summary, the MeasureThat.net benchmark compares the performance of three string processing approaches in JavaScript. Each method has its strengths and weaknesses, and the choice ultimately depends on factors like accuracy, performance, and complexity.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/112.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 112 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
string.replace	1592247.1 Ops/sec
string.matchAll	1157119.8 Ops/sec
regexp.exec	4149623.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

ExtractTokens-stringreplace-vs-stringmatchall-vs-regexpexec (version: 0)

Comparing performance of string.replace vs string.matchAll vs regexp.exec

Comparing performance of: string.replace vs string.matchAll vs regexp.exec

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

string.replace

string.matchAll

regexp.exec

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 28 days ago):