Benchmark: replaceAll vs rgx replace

Tests:

replace regex
"this is it".replace(/ /g, "+");
replace All
"this is it".replaceAll(" ", "+");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
replace regex
replace All

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros/cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON defines two benchmarks:

1. `replaceAll vs rgx replace`: This is the main benchmark that compares two approaches: using the `replaceAll` method with a regular expression (regex) and using a regex with the `/g` flag.
2. Script Preparation Code and HTML Preparation Code are empty, which means there's no code to prepare before running the benchmarks.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **"replace regex"`: This test case runs the JavaScript code:
```javascript
"This is it".replace(/ /g, "+");
```
This code uses a regular expression (`/ /g`) with the `/g` flag to replace all spaces in the string `this is it` with the character `+`.
2. **"replace All"`: This test case runs the JavaScript code:
```javascript
this is it.replaceAll(" ", "+");
```
This code uses a method called `replaceAll` (not a standard JavaScript method) to replace all spaces in the string `this is it` with the character `+`. However, I assume this is likely a typo or an implementation of the `replaceAll` method specific to some library.

**What's being tested**

The two test cases are comparing the performance of replacing strings using different approaches:

1. Using a regular expression with the `/g` flag (test case: "replace regex").
2. Using a non-standard `replaceAll` method or an implementation of it (test case: "replace All").

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

1. **Using a regular expression with the `/g` flag (`"replace regex"`)**:
	* Pros: Efficient, as it only scans the string once.
	* Cons: May not be optimal for large strings or complex replacements.
2. **Using a non-standard `replaceAll` method (`"replace All"`)**:
	* Pros: None mentioned in the benchmark definition.
	* Cons: Unknown performance characteristics, possibly slower than the first approach.

**Library Usage**

The library being used here is likely one of the following:

1. A custom implementation of the `replaceAll` method (as mentioned in test case "replace All").
2. A utility library that provides a `replaceAll` function (e.g., Lodash).

**Special JavaScript Feature/Syntax**

There's no mention of any special JavaScript features or syntax being used here.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for replacing strings could include:

1. Using the `replace()` method with an array of replacement characters.
2. Using a library like Lodash, which provides a `replaceAll` function.
3. Using a string replace function from a dedicated library (e.g., String.prototype.replaceAll() in some implementations).

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not be relevant to the specific benchmark definition and test cases provided.

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/119.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 119 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
replace regex	12294145.0 Ops/sec
replace All	10267927.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

replaceAll vs rgx replace (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: replace regex vs replace All

Created: 6 months ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

replace regex

replace All

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 26 days ago):