Ecosyste.ms: Awesome
An open API service indexing awesome lists of open source software.
https://github.com/squirrelchat/smol-toml
A small, fast, and correct TOML (1.0.0) parser and serializer
https://github.com/squirrelchat/smol-toml
javascript nodejs parser serializer toml toml-parser toml-serializer toml-stringify typescript
Last synced: 3 days ago
JSON representation
A small, fast, and correct TOML (1.0.0) parser and serializer
- Host: GitHub
- URL: https://github.com/squirrelchat/smol-toml
- Owner: squirrelchat
- License: bsd-3-clause
- Created: 2023-05-03T14:46:49.000Z (over 1 year ago)
- Default Branch: mistress
- Last Pushed: 2024-11-22T20:24:56.000Z (about 2 months ago)
- Last Synced: 2025-01-07T22:02:37.156Z (10 days ago)
- Topics: javascript, nodejs, parser, serializer, toml, toml-parser, toml-serializer, toml-stringify, typescript
- Language: TypeScript
- Homepage:
- Size: 3.55 MB
- Stars: 164
- Watchers: 2
- Forks: 9
- Open Issues: 5
-
Metadata Files:
- Readme: README.md
- License: LICENSE
Awesome Lists containing this project
README
# smol-toml
[](https://toml.io/en/v1.0.0)
[](https://github.com/squirrelchat/smol-toml/blob/mistress/LICENSE)
[](https://npm.im/smol-toml)
[](https://github.com/squirrelchat/smol-toml/actions/workflows/build.yml)
A small, fast, and correct TOML parser and serializer. smol-toml is fully(ish) spec-compliant with TOML v1.0.0.
Why yet another TOML parser? Well, the ecosystem of TOML parsers in JavaScript is quite underwhelming, most likely due
to a lack of interest. With most parsers being outdated, unmaintained, non-compliant, or a combination of these, a new
parser didn't feel too out of place.
*[insert xkcd 927]*
smol-toml passes most of the tests from the [`toml-test` suite](https://github.com/toml-lang/toml-test); use the
`run-toml-test.bash` script to run the tests. Due to the nature of JavaScript and the limits of the language,
it doesn't pass certain tests, namely:
- Invalid UTF-8 strings are not rejected
- Certain invalid UTF-8 codepoints are not rejected
- Certain invalid dates are not rejected
- For instance, `2023-02-30` would be accepted and parsed as `2023-03-02`. While additional checks could be performed
to reject these, they've not been added for performance reasons.
- smol-toml doesn't preserve type information between integers and floats (in JS, everything is a float)
You can see a list of all tests smol-toml fails (and the reason why it fails these) in the list of skipped tests in
`run-toml-test.bash`. Note that some failures are *not* specification violations per-se. For instance, the TOML spec
does not require 64-bit integer range support or sub-millisecond time precision, but are included in the `toml-test`
suite. See https://github.com/toml-lang/toml-test/issues/154 and https://github.com/toml-lang/toml-test/issues/155
## Installation
```
[pnpm | yarn | npm] i smol-toml
```
## Usage
```js
import { parse, stringify } from 'smol-toml'
const doc = '...'
const parsed = parse(doc)
console.log(parsed)
const toml = stringify(parsed)
console.log(toml)
```
Alternatively, if you prefer something similar to the JSON global, you can import the library as follows
```js
import TOML from 'smol-toml'
TOML.stringify({ ... })
```
A few notes on the `stringify` function:
- `undefined` and `null` values on objects are ignored (does not produce a key/value).
- `undefined` and `null` values in arrays are **rejected**.
- Functions, classes and symbols are **rejected**.
- floats will be serialized as integers if they don't have a decimal part.
- `stringify(parse('a = 1.0')) === 'a = 1'`
- JS `Date` will be serialized as Offset Date Time
- Use the [`TomlDate` object](#dates) for representing other types.
### Dates
`smol-toml` uses an extended `Date` object to represent all types of TOML Dates. In the future, `smol-toml` will use
objects from the Temporal proposal, but for now we're stuck with the legacy Date object.
```js
import { TomlDate } from 'smol-toml'
// Offset Date Time
const date = new TomlDate('1979-05-27T07:32:00.000-08:00')
console.log(date.isDateTime(), date.isDate(), date.isTime(), date.isLocal()) // ~> true, false, false, false
console.log(date.toISOString()) // ~> 1979-05-27T07:32:00.000-08:00
// Local Date Time
const date = new TomlDate('1979-05-27T07:32:00.000')
console.log(date.isDateTime(), date.isDate(), date.isTime(), date.isLocal()) // ~> true, false, false, true
console.log(date.toISOString()) // ~> 1979-05-27T07:32:00.000
// Local Date
const date = new TomlDate('1979-05-27')
console.log(date.isDateTime(), date.isDate(), date.isTime(), date.isLocal()) // ~> false, true, false, true
console.log(date.toISOString()) // ~> 1979-05-27
// Local Time
const date = new TomlDate('07:32:00')
console.log(date.isDateTime(), date.isDate(), date.isTime(), date.isLocal()) // ~> false, false, true, true
console.log(date.toISOString()) // ~> 07:32:00.000
```
You can also wrap a native `Date` object and specify using different methods depending on the type of date you wish
to represent:
```js
import { TomlDate } from 'smol-toml'
const jsDate = new Date()
const offsetDateTime = TomlDate.wrapAsOffsetDateTime(jsDate)
const localDateTime = TomlDate.wrapAsLocalDateTime(jsDate)
const localDate = TomlDate.wrapAsLocalDate(jsDate)
const localTime = TomlDate.wrapAsLocalTime(jsDate)
```
## Performance
A note on these performance numbers: in some highly synthetic tests, other parsers such as `fast-toml` greatly
outperform other parsers, mostly due to their lack of compliance with the spec. For example, to parse a string,
`fast-toml` skips the entire string while `smol-toml` does validate the string, costing a fair share of performance.
The ~5MB test file used for benchmark here is filled with random data which attempts to be close-ish to reality in
terms of structure. The idea is to have a file relatively close to a real-world application, with moderately sized
strings etc.
The large TOML generator can be found [here](https://gist.github.com/cyyynthia/e77c744cb6494dabe37d0182506526b9)
| **Parse** | smol-toml | @iarna/[email protected] | @ltd/j-toml | fast-toml |
|----------------|---------------------|-------------------|-----------------|-----------------|
| Spec example | **71,356.51 op/s** | 33,629.31 op/s | 16,433.86 op/s | 29,421.60 op/s |
| ~5MB test file | **3.8091 op/s** | *DNF* | 2.4369 op/s | 2.6078 op/s |
| **Stringify** | smol-toml | @iarna/[email protected] | @ltd/j-toml |
|----------------|----------------------|-------------------|----------------|
| Spec example | **195,191.99 op/s** | 46,583.07 op/s | 5,670.12 op/s |
| ~5MB test file | **14.6709 op/s** | 3.5941 op/s | 0.7856 op/s |
Detailed benchmark data
Tests ran using Vitest v0.31.0 on commit f58cb6152e667e9cea09f31c93d90652e3b82bf5
CPU: Intel Core i7 7700K (4.2GHz)
```
RUN v0.31.0
✓ bench/parseSpecExample.bench.ts (4) 2462ms
name hz min max mean p75 p99 p995 p999 rme samples
· smol-toml 71,356.51 0.0132 0.2633 0.0140 0.0137 0.0219 0.0266 0.1135 ±0.37% 35679 fastest
· @iarna/toml 33,629.31 0.0272 0.2629 0.0297 0.0287 0.0571 0.0650 0.1593 ±0.45% 16815
· @ltd/j-toml 16,433.86 0.0523 1.3088 0.0608 0.0550 0.1140 0.1525 0.7348 ±1.47% 8217 slowest
· fast-toml 29,421.60 0.0305 0.2995 0.0340 0.0312 0.0618 0.0640 0.1553 ±0.47% 14711
✓ bench/parseLargeMixed.bench.ts (3) 16062ms
name hz min max mean p75 p99 p995 p999 rme samples
· smol-toml 3.8091 239.60 287.30 262.53 274.17 287.30 287.30 287.30 ±3.66% 10 fastest
· @ltd/j-toml 2.4369 376.73 493.49 410.35 442.58 493.49 493.49 493.49 ±7.08% 10 slowest
· fast-toml 2.6078 373.88 412.79 383.47 388.62 412.79 412.79 412.79 ±2.72% 10
✓ bench/stringifySpecExample.bench.ts (3) 1886ms
name hz min max mean p75 p99 p995 p999 rme samples
· smol-toml 195,191.99 0.0047 0.2704 0.0051 0.0050 0.0099 0.0110 0.0152 ±0.41% 97596 fastest
· @iarna/toml 46,583.07 0.0197 0.2808 0.0215 0.0208 0.0448 0.0470 0.1704 ±0.47% 23292
· @ltd/j-toml 5,670.12 0.1613 0.5768 0.1764 0.1726 0.3036 0.3129 0.4324 ±0.56% 2836 slowest
✓ bench/stringifyLargeMixed.bench.ts (3) 24057ms
name hz min max mean p75 p99 p995 p999 rme samples
· smol-toml 14.6709 65.1071 79.2199 68.1623 67.1088 79.2199 79.2199 79.2199 ±5.25% 10 fastest
· @iarna/toml 3.5941 266.48 295.24 278.24 290.10 295.24 295.24 295.24 ±2.83% 10
· @ltd/j-toml 0.7856 1,254.33 1,322.05 1,272.87 1,286.82 1,322.05 1,322.05 1,322.05 ±1.37% 10 slowest
BENCH Summary
smol-toml - bench/parseLargeMixed.bench.ts >
1.46x faster than fast-toml
1.56x faster than @ltd/j-toml
smol-toml - bench/parseSpecExample.bench.ts >
2.12x faster than @iarna/toml
2.43x faster than fast-toml
4.34x faster than @ltd/j-toml
smol-toml - bench/stringifyLargeMixed.bench.ts >
4.00x faster than @iarna/toml
18.33x faster than @ltd/j-toml
smol-toml - bench/stringifySpecExample.bench.ts >
4.19x faster than @iarna/toml
34.42x faster than @ltd/j-toml
```
---
Additional notes:
I initially tried to benchmark `toml-nodejs`, but the 0.3.0 package is broken.
I initially reported this to the library author, but the author decided to
- a) advise to use a custom loader (via *experimental* flag) to circumvent the invalid imports.
- Said flag, `--experimental-specifier-resolution`, has been removed in Node v20.
- b) [delete the issue](https://github.com/huan231/toml-nodejs/issues/12) when pointed out links to the NodeJS
documentation about the flag removal and standard resolution algorithm.
For the reference anyway, `toml-nodejs` (with proper imports) is ~8x slower on both parse benchmark with:
- spec example: 7,543.47 op/s
- 5mb mixed: 0.7006 op/s