Benchmark: pathToArray ramda vs. vanila

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.27.1/ramda.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var text = 'lorem/ipsum/dolor/sit/amet';

var pathToArrayR = R.ifElse(R.is(String), R.split('/'), R.defaultTo([]));

var pathToArrayV = (txt = '') => txt.split('/');

Tests:

vanila
pathToArrayV(text)
ramda
pathToArrayR(text)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
vanila
ramda

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The JSON file defines a benchmark test between two approaches: using Ramda (a functional programming library) and vanilla JavaScript to convert a URL path to an array of individual path components.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Ramda (`R`)**: A functional programming library that provides a set of high-order functions for manipulating data.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript**: The standard JavaScript language without any libraries or frameworks, using only built-in functions and syntax.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

* **Ramda**:
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and expressive code
		- Faster execution due to optimized implementation
	+ Cons:
		- Requires including an additional library ( Ramda.min.js)
		- May have a steeper learning curve for developers unfamiliar with functional programming concepts
* **Vanilla JavaScript**:
	+ Pros:
		- No additional dependencies or libraries needed
		- Widely supported and well-understood by most developers
	+ Cons:
		- More verbose code compared to Ramda
		- May have slower execution due to less optimized implementation

**Library: Ramda**

Ramda is a popular functional programming library for JavaScript. Its primary purpose is to provide a set of high-order functions that can be used to manipulate data in a predictable and consistent way. In this benchmark, Ramda's `ifElse` function is used to conditionally split the URL path into individual components.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript functions and syntax, with Ramda's library providing an alternative implementation for the `ifElse` function.

**Other Considerations**

This benchmark focuses on the performance difference between using Ramda and vanilla JavaScript to convert a URL path to an array of individual components. It assumes that the input URL path is a string containing multiple path components separated by forward slashes (`/`). The benchmark does not consider other factors that may affect performance, such as memory usage or caching.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to Ramda, some popular options include:

* Lodash: Another widely used functional programming library for JavaScript.
* Underscore.js: A utility library that provides a set of high-order functions for manipulating data.
* Built-in JavaScript functions (e.g., `Array.prototype.map()`, `String.prototype.split()`): These can be used as alternatives to Ramda's implementation, but may not be as concise or efficient.

Keep in mind that the choice of library or approach ultimately depends on your specific use case and performance requirements.

Related benchmarks:

pathToArray ramda vs. vanila (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: vanila vs ramda

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

vanila

ramda

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):