Benchmark: check vs replace 3

Tests:

check first
let s = ["//test.org/test/test/25187960#25187960", "/test/test/25187960#25187960"]; let replced = ""; for (let k = 0; k < 300; k++) { let ss = s[k % 2]; if (ss.startsWith("//")) { replaced = ss.replace("//test.org"); } }
replace
let s = ["//test.org/test/test/25187960#25187960", "/test/test/25187960#25187960"]; let replced = ""; for (let k = 0; k < 300; k++) { let ss = s[k % 2]; replaced = ss.replace("//test.org"); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
check first
replace

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition and Options**

The provided benchmark definition is for comparing two approaches: `check` and `replace`. The script preparation code is empty, which means that the benchmark creator has chosen not to include any additional setup or initialization code in the test cases.

In this case, we have two test cases:

1. "Check first" (Benchmark Definition: [insert Benchmark Definition])
2. "Replace" (Benchmark Definition: [insert Benchmark Definition])

The main difference between these two approaches is how they handle the replacement of a substring.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

### Check-first Approach

In this approach, we check if the string starts with `"//test.org"` before replacing it. The pros of this approach are:

* It avoids unnecessary replacements, which can reduce the number of iterations.
* It allows for more control over when the replacement occurs.

However, there's a potential con: if the string doesn't start with the expected substring, the replacement will not happen at all, which might lead to unexpected results.

### Replace Approach

In this approach, we simply replace the substring without checking if it starts with `"//test.org"`. The pros of this approach are:

* It's simpler and more concise.
* It ensures that the replacement occurs regardless of the original string value.

However, there's a potential con: this approach might lead to unnecessary replacements, which can increase the number of iterations.

**Library Used**

In both test cases, we're using the `String.prototype.replace()` method to perform the substring replacement. This is a built-in JavaScript method that replaces specified characters or substrings with other values.

No additional libraries are used in this benchmark.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There's no mention of any special JavaScript features or syntax being used in this benchmark. The code is straightforward and uses standard JavaScript constructs.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

* **Use a regular expression**: Instead of using the `String.prototype.replace()` method, you could use a regular expression to perform the replacement. This might be more efficient for large datasets.
* **Use a different string manipulation method**: Depending on your specific requirements, you might want to explore alternative string manipulation methods, such as `String.prototype.split()`, `String.prototype.concat()`, or even `String.prototype.slice()`.

Keep in mind that these alternatives will depend on the specific use case and performance characteristics of your application.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/113.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 113 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
check first	37842.7 Ops/sec
replace	19125.6 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

check vs replace 3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: check first vs replace

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

check first

replace

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 25 days ago):