Benchmark: ramda capitalize vs vanila capitalize 3

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';

Tests:

ramda
const capitalize = R.when( R.is(String), R.pipe(R.toLower, R.replace(/^./, R.toUpper)), ); var result = capitalize(text);
vanilla
function capitalize(text) { return text[0].toUpperCase() + text.slice(1).toLowerCase(); } var result = capitalize(text);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ramda
vanilla

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.

I'd be happy to explain what's being tested in this benchmark and the pros and cons of different approaches.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks that test the performance of string capitalization functions, one using Ramda (a functional programming library) and another using vanilla JavaScript.

**Options compared:**

1. **Ramda's `capitalize` function**: This is a higher-order function that takes an input string and returns the capitalized version. It uses the `R.when` method to first check if the input is a string, and then applies the `R.pipe` method to transform it into uppercase.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript's `toUpperCase` and `toLowerCase` methods**: This implementation simply converts the entire string to uppercase using the `toUpperCase` method and then converts all lowercase characters back to their original case using the `toLowerCase` method.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **Ramda's `capitalize` function:**
	* Pros:
		+ More concise and expressive code.
		+ Uses functional programming principles, which can lead to more efficient and predictable results.
	* Cons:
		+ May have a higher overhead due to the use of an external library.
		+ Can be less performant than a straightforward vanilla JavaScript implementation.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript's `toUpperCase` and `toLowerCase` methods:**
	* Pros:
		+ Lightweight and optimized for performance.
		+ Does not rely on an external library, making it easier to understand and maintain.
	* Cons:
		+ More verbose code that can be harder to read and write.
		+ May have more overhead due to the repeated operations of `toUpperCase` and `toLowerCase`.

**Library: Ramda**

Ramda is a popular functional programming library for JavaScript. It provides a set of reusable functions that can be composed together to create more complex functionality. In this benchmark, the `R.when` and `R.pipe` methods are used to define the `capitalize` function.

**Special JS feature or syntax: None**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you wanted to use different string capitalization functions, you could consider using:

1. **String.prototype.toLocaleUpperCase() and String.prototype.toLocaleLowerCase()**: These methods are part of the ECMAScript 5 specification and provide a more modern way of handling locale-specific case conversion.
2. ** Intl.Collator API**: This API provides a more comprehensive way of handling case conversion, including support for various locales and case forms.

However, these alternatives would likely introduce additional dependencies or complexity to the benchmark, so it's not surprising that Ramda and vanilla JavaScript implementations are being used here.

Related benchmarks:

ramda capitalize vs vanila capitalize 3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ramda vs vanilla

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ramda

vanilla

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):