Benchmark: regexp n such - MeasureThat.net

Script Preparation code:

var strings = [
  'bbbb',
  'AAbb',
  'aaBB',
  'AAbb11',
  'aaBB11',
  '11aaBB',
  'aaAAbb',
  'aaaa'
];

Tests:

regexp
const matches = strings.filter(s => /^(?=.*[A-Za-z])(?=.*\d)[A-Za-z\d$@!%*#?&-_]{4,14}$/.test(s)); if (matches.length !== 3) { throw 'invalid number of matches: ' + matches; }
many regexps
const matches = strings.filter(s => { return /^[\w$@!%*#?&-]{4,14}$/.test(s) && /[A-Z]/.test(s) && /[a-z]/.test(s) && /[0-9]/.test(s); }); if (matches.length !== 3) { throw 'invalid number of matches: ' + matches; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
regexp
many regexps

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 break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition json contains two separate benchmarks: `regexp` and `many regexps`. These benchmarks are designed to test the performance of different approaches to match strings against regular expressions.

**Options Compared**

In the `regexp` benchmark:

* Option 1 uses a broad regular expression with the `/g` flag, which allows the engine to find all matches in the string.
* Option 2 uses a series of more specific regular expressions without the `/g` flag.

In the `many regexps` benchmark:

* Option 1 uses multiple broad regular expressions with the `/g` flag.
* Option 2 uses multiple specific regular expressions without the `/g` flag.

**Pros and Cons**

The choice between these options depends on the trade-off between speed, memory usage, and complexity. Here are some general pros and cons of each approach:

* Broad regular expression with `/g`:
	+ Pros: Can handle a wide range of input strings and patterns.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the need to find all matches in the string.
* Specific regular expressions without `/g`:
	+ Pros: Faster and more memory-efficient, as each match is found individually.
	+ Cons: May not handle as many input strings or patterns.

**Library Used**

In both benchmarks, a filter function is used to process the `strings` array. This suggests that the benchmark is testing the performance of JavaScript's built-in `filter()` method in conjunction with regular expressions.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The tests are purely focused on the performance of different approaches to match strings against regular expressions.

**Other Considerations**

The benchmarks also include information about the device platform, operating system, and browser used to run the tests. This suggests that the results may be influenced by factors such as hardware acceleration or software optimizations.

**Alternative Approaches**

Some alternative approaches to this benchmark could include:

* Testing the performance of other regular expression engines, such as those provided by Node.js or Python's `re` module.
* Using a different programming language or framework to implement the same regular expression matching logic.
* Testing the performance of different optimization techniques, such as caching or memoization.

Overall, this benchmark provides valuable insights into the performance characteristics of JavaScript's built-in `filter()` method and its interaction with regular expressions.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_11_6) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/53.0.2785.116 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 53 on Mac OS X 10.11.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
regexp	574183.2 Ops/sec
many regexps	295866.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

regexp n such (version: 3)

testing the performance of a broad regexp vs a series of more specific regexps

Comparing performance of: regexp vs many regexps

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

regexp

many regexps

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):