Benchmark: String includes space (regex vs String.includes)

Script Preparation code:

var string = 'https://www.google.com?query=' + new Array(2083).fill('a');
var regex = /\s/;

Tests:

RegEx.test
regex.test(string);
String.includes
string.includes(" ");
String.match
string.match(" ");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
String.includes
String.match

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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/115.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 115 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RegEx.test	551604.8 Ops/sec
String.includes	30187178.0 Ops/sec
String.match	4575651.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark on `String includes space (regex vs String.includes)`. The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: using regular expressions (`RegExp.test`) and the built-in `String.includes` method.

**Comparison of Options**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Regular Expressions (RegEx)**: Using the `RegExp.test()` method to search for a space character (`\\s`) in the string.
2. **Built-in String Includes Method**: Using the `String.includes()` method to check if a space character is present in the string.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Regular Expressions (RegEx)**

Pros:

* Highly flexible and powerful pattern matching capabilities
* Can be used for more complex text processing tasks beyond just checking for specific characters

Cons:

* Performance overhead due to the complexity of the regular expression engine
* May be slower than the built-in `String.includes` method for simple character checks

**Built-in String Includes Method**

Pros:

* Fast and efficient, optimized for simple character checks
* Simple to use and understand for basic text processing tasks

Cons:

* Limited flexibility compared to regular expressions
* May not support more complex pattern matching requirements

**Library: RegExp (JavaScript)**

The `RegExp` library is used in the benchmark to implement the regular expression engine. The `RegExp.test()` method takes a string and a regular expression pattern as arguments, and returns a boolean indicating whether the pattern was found at the beginning of the string.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned in this specific benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you needed to check for space characters in a string without using regular expressions or the built-in `String.includes` method, other alternatives might include:

* Using the `indexOf()` method with a specific character code (e.g., `string.indexOf(' ')`)
* Using a library like `needle` or `js-chars` for efficient substring searching
* Implementing a custom text processing algorithm using bitwise operations and loop manipulation

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be as efficient or straightforward to use as the built-in `String.includes` method, which is optimized for this specific task.

Related benchmarks:

String includes space (regex vs String.includes) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs String.includes vs String.match

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

String.match

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):