Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
trim vs lodash/fp
(version: 2)
Comparing performance of:
lodash/fp trim vs trim native
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash-fp/0.10.4/lodash-fp.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var test = "abc a testing";
Tests:
lodash/fp trim
_.trim(test);
trim native
test.trim()
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lodash/fp trim
trim native
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons. **Benchmark Overview** The test compares two approaches to trimming strings in JavaScript: using the native `trim()` method (also known as "trim native") and using the `_trim()` function from the Lodash FP library (`lodash/fp trim`). **Options Compared** 1. **Trim Native**: This approach uses the built-in `trim()` method, which is a part of the JavaScript standard library. 2. **Lodash FP Trim**: This approach uses the `_trim()` function from the Lodash FP library, which provides a functional programming style for string manipulation. **Pros and Cons** * **Trim Native**: + Pros: Easy to use, lightweight, and widely supported by browsers. + Cons: May not be as flexible or customizable as other approaches. * **Lodash FP Trim**: + Pros: Provides a more functional programming style, which can be beneficial for developers familiar with Lodash. Can also handle edge cases more robustly. + Cons: Requires an additional library (Lodash FP), and the code may look less familiar to some developers. **Other Considerations** * **Functionality**: Both approaches trim whitespace characters from the beginning and end of a string. * **Performance**: The results show that the native `trim()` method is generally faster than using `_trim()` from Lodash FP. However, the performance difference might be negligible for most use cases. **Library Used - Lodash FP** Lodash FP (Functional Programming) is a library built on top of Lodash that provides functional programming utilities and curried functions for manipulating data structures like arrays and objects. The `_trim()` function in this benchmark uses the functional programming style to remove whitespace characters from the beginning and end of a string. **JavaScript Feature/Syntax** This benchmark does not explicitly use any special JavaScript features or syntax, apart from using the `var` keyword for variable declaration (although `let` and `const` would be more modern choices). The focus is on comparing two different approaches to trimming strings. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for string trimming include: * Using regular expressions (`String.prototype.replace()` with a regex pattern) * Using a utility library like Underscore.js or Ramda * Implementing a custom trimming function using a loop or recursion Keep in mind that the choice of approach ultimately depends on the specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.
Related benchmarks:
trim vs _.trim
trim loadsh vs native trim
trim-loadsh vs native-trim
trim-loadsh vs native-trim1
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?