[hyperpape]

The issue is that with the string/regex issue, there's a good reason that the string operation should be faster. Maybe a "sufficiently smart compiler" could optimize it in some cases of static regexes, but it's at least complicated. In cases where the regex is dynamically determined, even the sufficiently smart compiler probably can't optimize away the regex.

In contrast, the case in this article seems like table stakes for an optimizing compiler. It's just not eliminating common subexpressions. There's no reason to contort your code around something that should automatically happen.

[wlll]

When I've benchmarked regexes before (Ruby ISTR) there have been situations where the regex engine optimised the code to be comparable to string functions, I can't remember the details though. Just for fun I benchmarked =~ /\Asomething/ and start_with?("something"), a situation that seems could be optimisable by the regex engine, but the string function is still faster (Ruby 2.3.1):

start_with: 5703143.1 i/s regex: 2821224.4 i/s - 2.02x slower

That aside:

> There's no reason to contort your code around something that should automatically happen.

Absolutely, but it's a question of style at that point. "Contorting your code" suggests using a less desirable style/syntax for some gain, and I'd agree would be premature optimisation. If you're just making a choice between two styles that you consider to be pretty much equal then it's just pragmatic.

edit: Forgot to add, yes, I agree that this should happen automatically in the compiler :)

[hyperpape]

My point of view is that if you're two equally good styles based on the compiler, it's contorting your code. One doesn't have to be better than the other, if you can't make that choice between semantically identical options, you're conforming to an arbitrary standard.