Benchmark: asdøla skdøla sdasd

Script Preparation code:

var a = [
  'Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet',
  'Lorem ipsam dolor sit amet'
];
var reg1 = ['ipsam', 'ipsum'];
var reg2 = ['ips(a|u)m'];

Tests:

1
a.forEach(e => reg1.forEach(r => console.log(e.match(r))))
2
a.forEach(e => reg2.forEach(r => console.log(e.match(r))))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
1
2

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated one month ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down this JavaScript benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

This benchmark measures the performance of two different ways to find matches within strings.

* **Data:** It uses an array (`a`) containing two sentences: "Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet" and "Lorem ipsam dolor sit amet".  
* **Regular Expressions (Regex):** It has two sets of regex patterns (`reg1` and `reg2`) designed to match parts of these sentences.

**Test Cases:**

1. **Test Name "1":** Uses `a.forEach(e => reg1.forEach(r => console.log(e.match(r))))`. This iterates through each sentence (`e`) in the array and then for each regex pattern (`r`) in `reg1`, it uses `.match()` to find a match within the sentence. The matching result (if any) is logged to the console.

2. **Test Name "2":** Uses `a.forEach(e => reg2.forEach(r => console.log(e.match(r))))`.  This follows the same logic as Test 1, but uses a different set of regex patterns (`reg2`).

**Comparison:**

The benchmark aims to see if using `reg2` is faster than `reg1`. This difference likely stems from the structure and complexity of the regex patterns themselves. Simpler patterns generally execute faster.

**Alternatives:**

* **Using String Methods:** Instead of regex, you could use string methods like `.indexOf()` or `.substring()`. These might be less powerful for complex pattern matching but could be faster in simpler cases.
* **Dedicated Parsing Libraries:** If you're dealing with structured data (like HTML or JSON), dedicated parsing libraries can often outperform regex.

**Considerations:**

* **Benchmark Environment:** The execution speed heavily depends on the user's hardware and browser configuration.
* **Test Scope:**  This benchmark focuses on a very specific task (regex matching within strings). Real-world applications might involve more complex scenarios.

Let me know if you have any further questions or want to explore specific aspects in more detail!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_2) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/13.0.4 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 13 on Mac OS X 10.15.2

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
1	96235.7 Ops/sec
2	174609.3 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

asdøla skdøla sdasd (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: 1 vs 2

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

1

2

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model gemma2:9b, generated one month ago):