npmpackage.info

Gathering detailed insights and metrics for fast-string-compare

Other packages similar to fast-string-compare

react-fast-compare

3.2.2

Fastest deep equal comparison for React. Great for React.memo & shouldComponentUpdate. Also really fast general-purpose deep comparison.

string-natural-compare

3.0.1

Compare alphanumeric strings the same way a human would, using a natural order algorithm

natural-compare

1.4.0

Compare strings containing a mix of letters and numbers in the way a human being would in sort order.

compare-func

2.0.0

Get a compare function for array to sort

Gathering detailed insights and metrics for fast-string-compare

fast-string-compare

A (much) faster String.prototype.localeCompare

3.0.0

MIT

TypeScript

247.00 B

1,888,438 2.5

Installations

npm install fast-string-compare

Pull Requests

Open

0

Total

0

Closed

0

Issues

Open

1

Total

1

Closed

0

Releases

v3.0.0

Published on 02 Feb 2023

v2.0.0

Published on 13 Sept 2021

v1.0.0

Published on 09 Apr 2021

View all 3 releases

Developer

grantila

Developer Guide

BETA

Module System

ESM

Min. Node Version

^14.13.1 || >=16.0.0

Typescript Support

Yes

Node Version

18.13.0

NPM Version

8.19.3 Statistics

2 Stars

10 Commits

2 Watching

1 Branches

1 Contributors

Updated on 02 Feb 2023

Bundle Size

376.00 B

Minified

247.00 B

Minified + Gzipped

Bundlephobia

Languages

TypeScript (97.93%)

JavaScript (2.07%)

Total Downloads

Cumulative downloads

Total Downloads

1,888,438

Last day

-8.6%

4,984

Compared to previous day

Last week

-3.7%

25,050

Compared to previous week

Last month

16.1%

103,442

Compared to previous month

Last year

73.2%

962,253

Compared to previous year

Daily Downloads

Weekly Downloads

Monthly Downloads

Yearly Downloads

Dev Dependencies

@babel/preset-env @babel/preset-typescript @types/benchmark @types/bintrees @types/jest @types/node benchmark bintrees cz-conventional-changelog jest rimraf ts-node typescript

Versions

fast-string-compare

This is a (much) faster version of String.prototype.localeCompare() to compare two strings, useful for Array.prototype.sort() or for ordering strings in trees.

This is not equivalent to localeCompare, and does not return the same result. localeCompare respects the current locale (language), and orders e.g. both 'a' and 'A' before 'b'. See Intl.Collator.

The function exported by this package - compare - returns a pure binary comparison, and is therefore just as stable and useful if some deterministic order is needed, but not necessarily a human friendly order.

Versions

Since v2 this is a pure ESM package, and requires Node.js >=12.20. It cannot be used from CommonJS.
Since v3 requires Node.js >= 14.13.1.

API

1import { compare } from 'fast-string-compare'
2
3[ 'c', 'a', 'B' ].sort( compare ); // 'B', 'a', 'c'

Benchmark

Running this under a system heavily slowing down user code (e.g. Jest, with or without coverage), it will run much slower than localeCompare(). This is misleading, and not the case when not running in a test environment.

Look at the benchmark code and run it using yarn benchmark.

In these benchmarks, the fast compare is ~2-3x faster than localeCompare, but a large part of the benchmark is logic around the actual comparison, so the difference is likely larger for the pure comparison.

Benchmark results (the exported compare function is the 'fast' method):

❯ yarn -s benchmark
Benchmarking raw comparison algorithms...

Running test of: raw compare
fast           x 12,190,097 ops/sec ±0.50% (91 runs sampled)
fast double    x 11,263,299 ops/sec ±0.44% (91 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 7,343,412 ops/sec ±0.62% (91 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 11,552,827 ops/sec ±0.67% (87 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 6,341,841 ops/sec ±1.12% (86 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 5,599,850 ops/sec ±1.01% (90 runs sampled)

Benchmarking comparison algorithms for sort...

Running test of: english words
fast           x 2.15 ops/sec ±3.61% (10 runs sampled)
fast double    x 2.04 ops/sec ±5.87% (10 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 1.36 ops/sec ±2.53% (8 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 1.74 ops/sec ±2.18% (9 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 0.87 ops/sec ±0.82% (7 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 0.78 ops/sec ±4.24% (6 runs sampled)

Running test of: english words reversed
fast           x 2.12 ops/sec ±5.38% (10 runs sampled)
fast double    x 2.11 ops/sec ±1.76% (10 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 1.39 ops/sec ±3.90% (8 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 1.79 ops/sec ±1.79% (9 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 0.89 ops/sec ±0.28% (7 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 0.79 ops/sec ±3.82% (7 runs sampled)

Running test of: english words randomized
fast           x 2.12 ops/sec ±7.95% (10 runs sampled)
fast double    x 2.13 ops/sec ±1.59% (10 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 1.42 ops/sec ±0.55% (8 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 1.81 ops/sec ±0.53% (9 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 0.88 ops/sec ±3.13% (7 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 0.80 ops/sec ±2.20% (7 runs sampled)

Running test of: data type words
fast           x 10,857 ops/sec ±0.74% (92 runs sampled)
fast double    x 9,770 ops/sec ±0.76% (93 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 6,135 ops/sec ±0.44% (94 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 8,212 ops/sec ±0.89% (93 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 3,778 ops/sec ±0.47% (94 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 3,434 ops/sec ±0.87% (92 runs sampled)

Running test of: data type words reversed
fast           x 10,731 ops/sec ±1.09% (94 runs sampled)
fast double    x 9,643 ops/sec ±0.72% (92 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 6,109 ops/sec ±0.46% (92 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 8,158 ops/sec ±1.34% (93 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 3,800 ops/sec ±0.47% (93 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 3,438 ops/sec ±0.41% (92 runs sampled)

Running test of: data type words randomized
fast           x 10,776 ops/sec ±1.26% (92 runs sampled)
fast double    x 9,789 ops/sec ±0.38% (93 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 6,177 ops/sec ±0.32% (96 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 8,202 ops/sec ±1.04% (93 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 3,786 ops/sec ±0.39% (93 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 3,431 ops/sec ±0.50% (94 runs sampled)

Benchmarking comparison algorithms for trees...

Running test of: english words
fast           x 0.40 ops/sec ±2.35% (5 runs sampled)
fast double    x 0.36 ops/sec ±1.33% (5 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 0.28 ops/sec ±1.56% (5 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 0.32 ops/sec ±2.45% (5 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 0.24 ops/sec ±4.09% (5 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 0.22 ops/sec ±0.87% (5 runs sampled)

Running test of: english words reversed
fast           x 0.38 ops/sec ±1.87% (5 runs sampled)
fast double    x 0.36 ops/sec ±2.17% (5 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 0.28 ops/sec ±5.81% (5 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 0.32 ops/sec ±1.70% (5 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 0.24 ops/sec ±0.98% (5 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 0.22 ops/sec ±0.86% (5 runs sampled)

Running test of: english words randomized
fast           x 0.38 ops/sec ±1.03% (5 runs sampled)
fast double    x 0.36 ops/sec ±1.42% (5 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 0.28 ops/sec ±1.35% (5 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 0.33 ops/sec ±4.34% (5 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 0.24 ops/sec ±0.79% (5 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 0.22 ops/sec ±1.07% (5 runs sampled)

Running test of: data type words
fast           x 2,688 ops/sec ±0.69% (91 runs sampled)
fast double    x 2,386 ops/sec ±0.77% (95 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 1,653 ops/sec ±0.44% (95 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 1,898 ops/sec ±0.52% (93 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 1,259 ops/sec ±0.38% (93 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 1,143 ops/sec ±0.48% (94 runs sampled)

Running test of: data type words reversed
fast           x 2,728 ops/sec ±0.84% (92 runs sampled)
fast double    x 2,389 ops/sec ±0.45% (94 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 1,654 ops/sec ±0.38% (94 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 1,913 ops/sec ±0.34% (95 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 1,272 ops/sec ±0.39% (94 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 1,143 ops/sec ±0.54% (93 runs sampled)

Running test of: data type words randomized
fast           x 2,723 ops/sec ±0.73% (94 runs sampled)
fast double    x 2,399 ops/sec ±0.39% (95 runs sampled)
fast and slice x 1,639 ops/sec ±0.56% (93 runs sampled)
fast codepoint x 1,919 ops/sec ±0.44% (93 runs sampled)
Intl.Collator  x 1,272 ops/sec ±0.38% (93 runs sampled)
localeCompare  x 1,140 ops/sec ±0.89% (91 runs sampled)

No vulnerabilities found.

10

Dangerous-Workflow

Determines if the project's GitHub Action workflows avoid dangerous patterns.

10

Binary-Artifacts

Determines if the project has generated executable (binary) artifacts in the source repository.

10

License

Determines if the project has defined a license.

0

Maintained

Determines if the project is "actively maintained".

0

Code-Review

Determines if the project requires human code review before pull requests (aka merge requests) are merged.

0

SAST

Determines if the project uses static code analysis.

0

CII-Best-Practices

Determines if the project has an OpenSSF (formerly CII) Best Practices Badge.

0

Token-Permissions

Determines if the project's workflows follow the principle of least privilege.

0

Fuzzing

Determines if the project uses fuzzing.

0

Security-Policy

Determines if the project has published a security policy.

0

Pinned-Dependencies

Determines if the project has declared and pinned the dependencies of its build process.

0

Branch-Protection

Determines if the default and release branches are protected with GitHub's branch protection settings.

0

Vulnerabilities

Determines if the project has open, known unfixed vulnerabilities.

Score

2.5

/10

Last Scanned on 2024-11-18

The Open Source Security Foundation is a cross-industry collaboration to improve the security of open source software (OSS). The Scorecard provides security health metrics for open source projects.

Learn More