<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
console.log('');
const value = _.camelCase('Foo Bar');
console.log(value);
function camelize(str) {
return str.replace(/(?:^\w|[A-Z]|\b\w|\s+)/g, function (match, index) {
if (+match === 0) return ""; // or if (/\s+/.test(match)) for white spaces
return index == 0 ? match.toLowerCase() : match.toUpperCase();
});
}
const value = camelize('Foo Bar');
console.log(value);
--enable-precise-memory-info
flag.
Test case name | Result |
---|---|
lodash | |
regular |
Test name | Executions per second |
---|---|
lodash | 356863.3 Ops/sec |
regular | 389556.4 Ops/sec |
Let's break down what's being tested in the provided benchmark.
What is being tested?
The benchmark compares two approaches to achieve the same result: using Lodash (a popular JavaScript utility library) versus implementing it manually.
The test cases are designed to measure the performance difference between these two approaches:
_.camelCase
function from Lodash, which converts a string from camelCase to lowercase.Options compared
The benchmark compares two options:
Pros and cons of each approach:
Library: Lodash
Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for common tasks, such as:
_.camelCase
, _.kebabCase
)_.map
, _.filter
)_.merge
, _.cloneDeep
)Lodash is widely used in the JavaScript community and is considered a best practice for many projects.
Special JS feature or syntax
There are no special features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark. The regular expression approach uses standard JavaScript syntax, while Lodash relies on its own proprietary functions.
Now, let's talk about other alternatives: