Convert camelCase and PascalCase to Title Case
When is the phrase "j'ai bon" used?
How do I gain the trust of other PCs?
Kelvin type connection
Time travel short story where someone from the past follows the travelers back
What does this Swiss black on yellow rectangular traffic sign with a symbol looking like a dart mean?
Is swap gate equivalent to just exchanging the wire of the two qubits?
Definition of 'vrit'
Are there foreign customs agents on US soil?
Derivation of CDF of a function that results in an exponential distribution
Build a scale without computer
Does cooling a potato change the nature of its carbohydrates?
writing a function between sets vertically
Got a new frameset, don't know why I need this split ring collar?
Do details of my undergraduate title matter?
Does knowing the surface area of all faces uniquely determine a tetrahedron?
Is there a polite way to ask about one's ethnicity?
In windows systems, is renaming files functionally similar to deleting them?
Why swap space doesn't get filesystem check at boot time?
Would a 7805 5v regulator drain a 9v battery?
Time at 1G acceleration to travel 100 000 light years
Regex version of strip() - Ch. 7 Automate the Boring Stuff
Bash function: Execute $@ command with each argument in sequence executed separately
Is using Legacy mode is a bad thing to do?
How to recover a single blank shot from a film camera
Convert camelCase and PascalCase to Title Case
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
I'm trying to take camelCase and PascalCase strings into a function and spit them out as Title Case. This function also needs to be able to handle odd PascalCase strings with capitalized abbreviations such as "CDReceiverBox" and return a readable string - "CD Receiver Box".
My current working solution:
function splitCamelCase(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
I would like to condense the amount of replace statements I'm using by at least combining the first two replace statements and the last two together since they are semi similar. The more concise I can make this the better.
CodePen: https://codepen.io/andrewgarrison/pen/dEQrMy
javascript strings regex
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm trying to take camelCase and PascalCase strings into a function and spit them out as Title Case. This function also needs to be able to handle odd PascalCase strings with capitalized abbreviations such as "CDReceiverBox" and return a readable string - "CD Receiver Box".
My current working solution:
function splitCamelCase(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
I would like to condense the amount of replace statements I'm using by at least combining the first two replace statements and the last two together since they are semi similar. The more concise I can make this the better.
CodePen: https://codepen.io/andrewgarrison/pen/dEQrMy
javascript strings regex
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm trying to take camelCase and PascalCase strings into a function and spit them out as Title Case. This function also needs to be able to handle odd PascalCase strings with capitalized abbreviations such as "CDReceiverBox" and return a readable string - "CD Receiver Box".
My current working solution:
function splitCamelCase(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
I would like to condense the amount of replace statements I'm using by at least combining the first two replace statements and the last two together since they are semi similar. The more concise I can make this the better.
CodePen: https://codepen.io/andrewgarrison/pen/dEQrMy
javascript strings regex
$endgroup$
I'm trying to take camelCase and PascalCase strings into a function and spit them out as Title Case. This function also needs to be able to handle odd PascalCase strings with capitalized abbreviations such as "CDReceiverBox" and return a readable string - "CD Receiver Box".
My current working solution:
function splitCamelCase(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
I would like to condense the amount of replace statements I'm using by at least combining the first two replace statements and the last two together since they are semi similar. The more concise I can make this the better.
CodePen: https://codepen.io/andrewgarrison/pen/dEQrMy
javascript strings regex
javascript strings regex
edited May 31 at 17:39
200_success
134k21166439
134k21166439
asked May 31 at 14:24
Andrew GarrisonAndrew Garrison
785
785
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I like your solution quite a bit. It's clear, easy to read and I don't see any bugs.
There are many ways to condense the replace
calls as you mention, but I think you're at a point where such changes can easily have a disproportionate impact on readability. That's good--it means the code is already pretty optimal from that standpoint.
For example, here's a one-shot replace
using alternation, but its merit is debatable:
const splitCamelCase = s => s.replace(
/^[a-z]|^([A-Z]+)(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])+(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])(?=[a-z]+)/g,
m => " " + m.toUpperCase()
).trim()
;
The idea here is to enumerate each scenario, join the patterns with |
s, and provide an arrow function to handle the addition of a space and a capital letter for each match.
With the two extremes in mind, I prefer a balanced approach such as:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/s*([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
or perhaps
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
These should offer ideas as far as how far you want to go in making the succinctness versus readability tradeoff. But, failing the possibility of a shortcut I might have overlooked, keeping your code basically as-is seems like a fine option to me.
If it's performance you're after in reducing replace
calls, there's no guarantee that fewer calls will translate into better performance. Under the hood, the regex engine may make more passes to compensate; you can benchmark and tweak using a debugger like regex101. For performance, it's likely best to avoid regex entirely and write a single-pass loop by hand.
Here's a test runner:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
[
"AAABbbbbCcDddEEFffGGHhIiJ",
"AaBbCcDDEeFGgHHHH",
"CDBoomBoxAAAABbbbCCC",
"CDBoomBox",
"camelCase",
"camel",
"Camel",
"c",
"C",
"Aa",
"AA",
"aa",
"AAA",
"aB",
"aBC",
"aBCc",
"",
].forEach(test =>
console.log(
splitCamelCaseOriginal(test) === splitCamelCase(test)
? `'$test' -> '$splitCamelCase(test)'`
: "TEST FAILED"
)
);
function splitCamelCaseOriginal(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
FWIW, your code gives different results from the OP's for inputs likeaB
,aBC
oraBCd
that start with a lowercase letter followed by an uppercase letter. That's the one situation where it matters whether you capitalize the first letter before or after adding the spaces.
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
May 31 at 18:20
1
$begingroup$
Good catch, fixed.
$endgroup$
– ggorlen
May 31 at 19:08
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could save one .replace()
call by replacing the last two with:
.replace(/(^| ) +/g, "$1")
which both removes leading spaces and collapses multiple consecutive spaces to one anywhere else in the string. However, I'm not 100% sure that you should, since it's not really clear which way is more efficient in practice, and your way seems more readable anyway.
If you do keep the two calls separate, however, you should optimize the first regexp to / +/g
(with two spaces before to +
sign) or / 2,/g
(which means "two or more spaces"), to avoid unnecessarily matching and replacing single spaces. Also, swapping the order of the last two calls could improve performance slightly in cases where the only extra spaces to be removed are at the beginning of the string.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "196"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f221419%2fconvert-camelcase-and-pascalcase-to-title-case%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
I like your solution quite a bit. It's clear, easy to read and I don't see any bugs.
There are many ways to condense the replace
calls as you mention, but I think you're at a point where such changes can easily have a disproportionate impact on readability. That's good--it means the code is already pretty optimal from that standpoint.
For example, here's a one-shot replace
using alternation, but its merit is debatable:
const splitCamelCase = s => s.replace(
/^[a-z]|^([A-Z]+)(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])+(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])(?=[a-z]+)/g,
m => " " + m.toUpperCase()
).trim()
;
The idea here is to enumerate each scenario, join the patterns with |
s, and provide an arrow function to handle the addition of a space and a capital letter for each match.
With the two extremes in mind, I prefer a balanced approach such as:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/s*([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
or perhaps
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
These should offer ideas as far as how far you want to go in making the succinctness versus readability tradeoff. But, failing the possibility of a shortcut I might have overlooked, keeping your code basically as-is seems like a fine option to me.
If it's performance you're after in reducing replace
calls, there's no guarantee that fewer calls will translate into better performance. Under the hood, the regex engine may make more passes to compensate; you can benchmark and tweak using a debugger like regex101. For performance, it's likely best to avoid regex entirely and write a single-pass loop by hand.
Here's a test runner:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
[
"AAABbbbbCcDddEEFffGGHhIiJ",
"AaBbCcDDEeFGgHHHH",
"CDBoomBoxAAAABbbbCCC",
"CDBoomBox",
"camelCase",
"camel",
"Camel",
"c",
"C",
"Aa",
"AA",
"aa",
"AAA",
"aB",
"aBC",
"aBCc",
"",
].forEach(test =>
console.log(
splitCamelCaseOriginal(test) === splitCamelCase(test)
? `'$test' -> '$splitCamelCase(test)'`
: "TEST FAILED"
)
);
function splitCamelCaseOriginal(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
FWIW, your code gives different results from the OP's for inputs likeaB
,aBC
oraBCd
that start with a lowercase letter followed by an uppercase letter. That's the one situation where it matters whether you capitalize the first letter before or after adding the spaces.
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
May 31 at 18:20
1
$begingroup$
Good catch, fixed.
$endgroup$
– ggorlen
May 31 at 19:08
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I like your solution quite a bit. It's clear, easy to read and I don't see any bugs.
There are many ways to condense the replace
calls as you mention, but I think you're at a point where such changes can easily have a disproportionate impact on readability. That's good--it means the code is already pretty optimal from that standpoint.
For example, here's a one-shot replace
using alternation, but its merit is debatable:
const splitCamelCase = s => s.replace(
/^[a-z]|^([A-Z]+)(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])+(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])(?=[a-z]+)/g,
m => " " + m.toUpperCase()
).trim()
;
The idea here is to enumerate each scenario, join the patterns with |
s, and provide an arrow function to handle the addition of a space and a capital letter for each match.
With the two extremes in mind, I prefer a balanced approach such as:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/s*([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
or perhaps
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
These should offer ideas as far as how far you want to go in making the succinctness versus readability tradeoff. But, failing the possibility of a shortcut I might have overlooked, keeping your code basically as-is seems like a fine option to me.
If it's performance you're after in reducing replace
calls, there's no guarantee that fewer calls will translate into better performance. Under the hood, the regex engine may make more passes to compensate; you can benchmark and tweak using a debugger like regex101. For performance, it's likely best to avoid regex entirely and write a single-pass loop by hand.
Here's a test runner:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
[
"AAABbbbbCcDddEEFffGGHhIiJ",
"AaBbCcDDEeFGgHHHH",
"CDBoomBoxAAAABbbbCCC",
"CDBoomBox",
"camelCase",
"camel",
"Camel",
"c",
"C",
"Aa",
"AA",
"aa",
"AAA",
"aB",
"aBC",
"aBCc",
"",
].forEach(test =>
console.log(
splitCamelCaseOriginal(test) === splitCamelCase(test)
? `'$test' -> '$splitCamelCase(test)'`
: "TEST FAILED"
)
);
function splitCamelCaseOriginal(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
FWIW, your code gives different results from the OP's for inputs likeaB
,aBC
oraBCd
that start with a lowercase letter followed by an uppercase letter. That's the one situation where it matters whether you capitalize the first letter before or after adding the spaces.
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
May 31 at 18:20
1
$begingroup$
Good catch, fixed.
$endgroup$
– ggorlen
May 31 at 19:08
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I like your solution quite a bit. It's clear, easy to read and I don't see any bugs.
There are many ways to condense the replace
calls as you mention, but I think you're at a point where such changes can easily have a disproportionate impact on readability. That's good--it means the code is already pretty optimal from that standpoint.
For example, here's a one-shot replace
using alternation, but its merit is debatable:
const splitCamelCase = s => s.replace(
/^[a-z]|^([A-Z]+)(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])+(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])(?=[a-z]+)/g,
m => " " + m.toUpperCase()
).trim()
;
The idea here is to enumerate each scenario, join the patterns with |
s, and provide an arrow function to handle the addition of a space and a capital letter for each match.
With the two extremes in mind, I prefer a balanced approach such as:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/s*([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
or perhaps
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
These should offer ideas as far as how far you want to go in making the succinctness versus readability tradeoff. But, failing the possibility of a shortcut I might have overlooked, keeping your code basically as-is seems like a fine option to me.
If it's performance you're after in reducing replace
calls, there's no guarantee that fewer calls will translate into better performance. Under the hood, the regex engine may make more passes to compensate; you can benchmark and tweak using a debugger like regex101. For performance, it's likely best to avoid regex entirely and write a single-pass loop by hand.
Here's a test runner:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
[
"AAABbbbbCcDddEEFffGGHhIiJ",
"AaBbCcDDEeFGgHHHH",
"CDBoomBoxAAAABbbbCCC",
"CDBoomBox",
"camelCase",
"camel",
"Camel",
"c",
"C",
"Aa",
"AA",
"aa",
"AAA",
"aB",
"aBC",
"aBCc",
"",
].forEach(test =>
console.log(
splitCamelCaseOriginal(test) === splitCamelCase(test)
? `'$test' -> '$splitCamelCase(test)'`
: "TEST FAILED"
)
);
function splitCamelCaseOriginal(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
$endgroup$
I like your solution quite a bit. It's clear, easy to read and I don't see any bugs.
There are many ways to condense the replace
calls as you mention, but I think you're at a point where such changes can easily have a disproportionate impact on readability. That's good--it means the code is already pretty optimal from that standpoint.
For example, here's a one-shot replace
using alternation, but its merit is debatable:
const splitCamelCase = s => s.replace(
/^[a-z]|^([A-Z]+)(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])+(?=[A-Z]|$)|([A-Z])(?=[a-z]+)/g,
m => " " + m.toUpperCase()
).trim()
;
The idea here is to enumerate each scenario, join the patterns with |
s, and provide an arrow function to handle the addition of a space and a capital letter for each match.
With the two extremes in mind, I prefer a balanced approach such as:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/s*([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
or perhaps
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
These should offer ideas as far as how far you want to go in making the succinctness versus readability tradeoff. But, failing the possibility of a shortcut I might have overlooked, keeping your code basically as-is seems like a fine option to me.
If it's performance you're after in reducing replace
calls, there's no guarantee that fewer calls will translate into better performance. Under the hood, the regex engine may make more passes to compensate; you can benchmark and tweak using a debugger like regex101. For performance, it's likely best to avoid regex entirely and write a single-pass loop by hand.
Here's a test runner:
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
[
"AAABbbbbCcDddEEFffGGHhIiJ",
"AaBbCcDDEeFGgHHHH",
"CDBoomBoxAAAABbbbCCC",
"CDBoomBox",
"camelCase",
"camel",
"Camel",
"c",
"C",
"Aa",
"AA",
"aa",
"AAA",
"aB",
"aBC",
"aBCc",
"",
].forEach(test =>
console.log(
splitCamelCaseOriginal(test) === splitCamelCase(test)
? `'$test' -> '$splitCamelCase(test)'`
: "TEST FAILED"
)
);
function splitCamelCaseOriginal(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
[
"AAABbbbbCcDddEEFffGGHhIiJ",
"AaBbCcDDEeFGgHHHH",
"CDBoomBoxAAAABbbbCCC",
"CDBoomBox",
"camelCase",
"camel",
"Camel",
"c",
"C",
"Aa",
"AA",
"aa",
"AAA",
"aB",
"aBC",
"aBCc",
"",
].forEach(test =>
console.log(
splitCamelCaseOriginal(test) === splitCamelCase(test)
? `'$test' -> '$splitCamelCase(test)'`
: "TEST FAILED"
)
);
function splitCamelCaseOriginal(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
const splitCamelCase = s =>
s.replace(/([A-Z][a-z]|[A-Z]+(?=[A-Z]|$))/g, " $1")
.replace(/./, m => m.toUpperCase())
.trim()
;
[
"AAABbbbbCcDddEEFffGGHhIiJ",
"AaBbCcDDEeFGgHHHH",
"CDBoomBoxAAAABbbbCCC",
"CDBoomBox",
"camelCase",
"camel",
"Camel",
"c",
"C",
"Aa",
"AA",
"aa",
"AAA",
"aB",
"aBC",
"aBCc",
"",
].forEach(test =>
console.log(
splitCamelCaseOriginal(test) === splitCamelCase(test)
? `'$test' -> '$splitCamelCase(test)'`
: "TEST FAILED"
)
);
function splitCamelCaseOriginal(camelCaseString)
const result = camelCaseString
.replace(/([A-Z][a-z])/g, " $1")
.replace(/([A-Z]+)/g, " $1")
.replace(/ +/g, " ")
.replace(/^ +/g, "");
return result.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + result.slice(1);
edited May 31 at 19:20
answered May 31 at 16:24
ggorlenggorlen
8881415
8881415
$begingroup$
FWIW, your code gives different results from the OP's for inputs likeaB
,aBC
oraBCd
that start with a lowercase letter followed by an uppercase letter. That's the one situation where it matters whether you capitalize the first letter before or after adding the spaces.
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
May 31 at 18:20
1
$begingroup$
Good catch, fixed.
$endgroup$
– ggorlen
May 31 at 19:08
add a comment |
$begingroup$
FWIW, your code gives different results from the OP's for inputs likeaB
,aBC
oraBCd
that start with a lowercase letter followed by an uppercase letter. That's the one situation where it matters whether you capitalize the first letter before or after adding the spaces.
$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
May 31 at 18:20
1
$begingroup$
Good catch, fixed.
$endgroup$
– ggorlen
May 31 at 19:08
$begingroup$
FWIW, your code gives different results from the OP's for inputs like
aB
, aBC
or aBCd
that start with a lowercase letter followed by an uppercase letter. That's the one situation where it matters whether you capitalize the first letter before or after adding the spaces.$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
May 31 at 18:20
$begingroup$
FWIW, your code gives different results from the OP's for inputs like
aB
, aBC
or aBCd
that start with a lowercase letter followed by an uppercase letter. That's the one situation where it matters whether you capitalize the first letter before or after adding the spaces.$endgroup$
– Ilmari Karonen
May 31 at 18:20
1
1
$begingroup$
Good catch, fixed.
$endgroup$
– ggorlen
May 31 at 19:08
$begingroup$
Good catch, fixed.
$endgroup$
– ggorlen
May 31 at 19:08
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could save one .replace()
call by replacing the last two with:
.replace(/(^| ) +/g, "$1")
which both removes leading spaces and collapses multiple consecutive spaces to one anywhere else in the string. However, I'm not 100% sure that you should, since it's not really clear which way is more efficient in practice, and your way seems more readable anyway.
If you do keep the two calls separate, however, you should optimize the first regexp to / +/g
(with two spaces before to +
sign) or / 2,/g
(which means "two or more spaces"), to avoid unnecessarily matching and replacing single spaces. Also, swapping the order of the last two calls could improve performance slightly in cases where the only extra spaces to be removed are at the beginning of the string.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could save one .replace()
call by replacing the last two with:
.replace(/(^| ) +/g, "$1")
which both removes leading spaces and collapses multiple consecutive spaces to one anywhere else in the string. However, I'm not 100% sure that you should, since it's not really clear which way is more efficient in practice, and your way seems more readable anyway.
If you do keep the two calls separate, however, you should optimize the first regexp to / +/g
(with two spaces before to +
sign) or / 2,/g
(which means "two or more spaces"), to avoid unnecessarily matching and replacing single spaces. Also, swapping the order of the last two calls could improve performance slightly in cases where the only extra spaces to be removed are at the beginning of the string.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
You could save one .replace()
call by replacing the last two with:
.replace(/(^| ) +/g, "$1")
which both removes leading spaces and collapses multiple consecutive spaces to one anywhere else in the string. However, I'm not 100% sure that you should, since it's not really clear which way is more efficient in practice, and your way seems more readable anyway.
If you do keep the two calls separate, however, you should optimize the first regexp to / +/g
(with two spaces before to +
sign) or / 2,/g
(which means "two or more spaces"), to avoid unnecessarily matching and replacing single spaces. Also, swapping the order of the last two calls could improve performance slightly in cases where the only extra spaces to be removed are at the beginning of the string.
$endgroup$
You could save one .replace()
call by replacing the last two with:
.replace(/(^| ) +/g, "$1")
which both removes leading spaces and collapses multiple consecutive spaces to one anywhere else in the string. However, I'm not 100% sure that you should, since it's not really clear which way is more efficient in practice, and your way seems more readable anyway.
If you do keep the two calls separate, however, you should optimize the first regexp to / +/g
(with two spaces before to +
sign) or / 2,/g
(which means "two or more spaces"), to avoid unnecessarily matching and replacing single spaces. Also, swapping the order of the last two calls could improve performance slightly in cases where the only extra spaces to be removed are at the beginning of the string.
edited Jun 1 at 21:29
Mitch McMabers
31
31
answered May 31 at 15:04
Ilmari KaronenIlmari Karonen
2,071916
2,071916
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f221419%2fconvert-camelcase-and-pascalcase-to-title-case%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown