Benchmark: capitalize_1 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Tests:

slice
function capitalize(str) { return `${str[0].toUpperCase()}${str.slice(1)}`; } for ( let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { capitalize('ho hiep 111'); }
destructure
function capitalize(str) { const [first, ...rest] = str; return `${first.toUpperCase()}${rest}`; } for ( let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { capitalize('ho hiep 111'); }
lodash
for ( let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { _.capitalize('ho hiep 111') }
replace
function capitalize(str) { return str.replace(/(^[a-z]|\s[a-z])/g, text => text.toUpperCase()) } for ( let i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { capitalize('ho hiep 111') }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
slice
destructure
lodash
replace

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**What is being tested?**

MeasureThat.net tests various ways to capitalize a string in JavaScript. The benchmark definition json provides four different approaches:

1. **Slice**: This approach uses string slicing to extract the first character and uppercase it, then concatenates it with the remaining characters.
2. **Destructure**: This approach uses destructuring to extract the first character from the string and uppercase it.
3. **Lodash**: This approach uses the `capitalize` function from the Lodash library to perform the capitalization.
4. **Replace**: This approach uses a regular expression to replace the first character (if any) with its uppercase equivalent.

**Options comparison**

Here's a brief overview of each approach:

* **Slice**: Pros: simple, efficient; Cons: assumes string has at least one character, can be slow for empty strings.
	+ This method is straightforward and works well for most use cases. However, it assumes that the input string always has at least one character, which might not always be the case.
* **Destructure**: Pros: concise, efficient; Cons: requires modern JavaScript features (ECMAScript 2015+, Node.js 10+), can be slow for very long strings.
	+ This method is concise and works well with modern JavaScript versions. However, it requires support for destructuring, which might not be available in older environments.
* **Lodash**: Pros: widely supported, efficient; Cons: adds dependency, slower for simple cases.
	+ This method uses a popular library to perform the capitalization, making it widely supported and efficient. However, it adds an extra dependency and might be slower than simpler approaches.
* **Replace**: Pros: general-purpose, efficient; Cons: can be slow for very long strings, may not work as expected with non-ASCII characters.
	+ This method is a general-purpose approach that works well with most input characters. However, it can be slower for very long strings and might not handle non-ASCII characters correctly.

**Other considerations**

* **Library usage**: The benchmark uses Lodash library to perform the capitalization in one of the test cases. This adds an extra dependency and may affect the overall performance.
* **Browser-specific optimizations**: Some browsers, like Chrome 88, provide special optimizations for certain JavaScript features (e.g., WebAssembly). MeasureThat.net might be using these optimizations to improve performance.
* **Test environment**: The benchmark is run on a desktop platform with Mac OS X 10.14.5, which may affect the results.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches or want to optimize your own capitalization function, here are some suggestions:

1. Use `String.prototype.toUpperCase()` method, which is widely supported and efficient.
2. Implement a custom capitalization function using a simple loop, like this: `function capitalize(str) { return str.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + str.slice(1); }`
3. Consider using other libraries or frameworks that provide optimized string manipulation functions.

I hope this explanation helps!

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_14_5) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.150 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Mac OS X 10.14.5

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
slice	84584.5 Ops/sec
destructure	1614.1 Ops/sec
lodash	4409.0 Ops/sec
replace	1088.2 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

capitalize_1 (version: 0)

capitalize_1

Comparing performance of: slice vs destructure vs lodash vs replace

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

slice

destructure

lodash

replace

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):