Benchmark: Classnames and CLSX

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/classnames/2.3.1/index.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/clsx@1.2.1/dist/clsx.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var str = 'style';
var obj = {
    'style-2': true,
    'style-3': false,
    'style-4': true,
}
var arr = ['style-5', 'style-6']

Tests:

classnames
let result = window.classNames(str, obj, arr, 'test classname')
clsx
let result = window.clsx(str, obj, arr, 'test classname')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
classnames
clsx

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 definition and test cases to understand what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that tests two different library functions: `classNames` and `clsx`. The benchmarks are designed to measure the performance of these libraries in a specific scenario.

**What is being tested?**

In this benchmark, two libraries are compared:

1. `classnames`: A lightweight utility function for conditionally joining class names.
2. `clsx`: Another utility function for conditionally joining class names, with additional features like support for nested classes and a more concise syntax.

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

* `classNames` library: Its performance and usage in this specific benchmark scenario.
* `clsx` library: Its performance and usage in the same benchmark scenario.

**Pros and cons of each approach**

1. **classnames**
	* Pros:
		+ Lightweight and easy to use.
		+ Supports basic class name joining functionality.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be as efficient or feature-rich as `clsx`.
2. **clsx**
	* Pros:
		+ Offers more features, such as support for nested classes and a concise syntax.
		+ Can potentially outperform `classnames` in certain scenarios due to its optimized implementation.
	* Cons:
		+ May be slightly heavier or less straightforward to use than `classnames`.

**Library descriptions**

1. **classnames**
The `classnames` library is a simple utility function that conditionally joins class names based on an object with boolean values. It's designed for lightweight and efficient class name manipulation.
2. **clsx**
The `clsx` library, formerly known as `classnames`, has been refactored to include additional features like support for nested classes and a more concise syntax. The updated implementation aims to provide better performance and a more modern API.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None of the libraries explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax in this benchmark scenario. However, it's worth noting that `clsx` has replaced some of its original features with a more concise syntax, which may make it slightly less explicit in usage compared to older versions.

**Other alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative class name joining libraries, consider:

1. **DOMUtils**: A utility library from Mozilla that provides various DOM-related functions, including class name manipulation.
2. **utils**: A simple utility library with a `classnames`-like API for conditionally joining class names.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have slightly different design goals or usage patterns compared to the `classnames` and `clsx` libraries tested in this benchmark.

Related benchmarks:

Classnames and CLSX (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: classnames vs clsx

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

classnames

clsx

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):