lib: optimize styleText when validateStream is false

[RafaelGSS]

This commit optimizes the util.styleText when validateStream is false

---

➜  node2 git:(27ec4315b1f) ✗ node benchmark/compare.js --old ./node --new ./node-optimize --filter style-text util > style-text.out
[00:00:30|% 100| 1/1 files | 60/60 runs | 24/24 configs]: Done
 %
➜  node2 git:(27ec4315b1f) ✗ node-benchmark-compare style-text.out
                                                                                  confidence improvement accuracy (*)     (**)    (***)
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='invalid' messageType='boolean'                 3.10 %       ±9.95%  ±13.24%  ±17.23%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='invalid' messageType='invalid'                -8.84 %      ±10.73%  ±14.29%  ±18.61%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='invalid' messageType='number'                 -8.78 %       ±9.00%  ±12.00%  ±15.67%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='invalid' messageType='string'                 -9.09 %       ±9.55%  ±12.71%  ±16.55%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='italic' messageType='boolean'                 -4.34 %      ±10.50%  ±13.98%  ±18.20%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='italic' messageType='invalid'                 -0.16 %      ±11.98%  ±15.95%  ±20.75%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='italic' messageType='number'                  -4.44 %      ±10.75%  ±14.31%  ±18.62%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='italic' messageType='string'          ***    572.71 %     ±129.86% ±174.99% ±232.29%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='red' messageType='boolean'                     4.81 %      ±11.07%  ±14.73%  ±19.17%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='red' messageType='invalid'              *     12.15 %      ±10.44%  ±13.91%  ±18.14%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='red' messageType='number'                      4.98 %       ±8.31%  ±11.07%  ±14.44%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=0 format='red' messageType='string'             ***    602.97 %     ±124.23% ±167.42% ±222.24%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='invalid' messageType='boolean'                 1.49 %       ±5.91%   ±7.87%  ±10.24%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='invalid' messageType='invalid'                -9.42 %       ±9.62%  ±12.82%  ±16.73%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='invalid' messageType='number'                 -4.64 %       ±9.81%  ±13.06%  ±17.02%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='invalid' messageType='string'                  9.27 %      ±10.24%  ±13.65%  ±17.83%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='italic' messageType='boolean'                  6.04 %       ±9.99%  ±13.30%  ±17.34%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='italic' messageType='invalid'                 -3.24 %       ±9.79%  ±13.04%  ±16.98%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='italic' messageType='number'                  -1.61 %       ±9.45%  ±12.58%  ±16.38%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='italic' messageType='string'                   2.10 %       ±9.03%  ±12.05%  ±15.74%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='red' messageType='boolean'                    -0.12 %       ±9.65%  ±12.84%  ±16.71%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='red' messageType='invalid'                    -5.44 %      ±11.00%  ±14.64%  ±19.07%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='red' messageType='number'                     -1.35 %       ±8.12%  ±10.81%  ±14.08%
util/style-text.js n=1000 validateStream=1 format='red' messageType='string'               *     -7.68 %       ±7.03%   ±9.36%  ±12.20%

Be aware that when doing many comparisons the risk of a false-positive result increases.
In this case, there are 24 comparisons, you can thus expect the following amount of false-positive results:
  1.20 false positives, when considering a   5% risk acceptance (*, **, ***),
  0.24 false positives, when considering a   1% risk acceptance (**, ***),
  0.02 false positives, when considering a 0.1% risk acceptance (***)

We are investigating how we can further optimise it without changing the API drastically.

[RafaelGSS]

@BridgeAR In our understanding to further optimize this, we would need to encapsulate this API into a Colorize-like API, where we could call .red().bold(). IIRC You have opened a PR to add a similar functionality, but it never landed on main.

Any objections to us pursuing that idea in a separate PR?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 89.73%. Comparing base (4a13a62) to head (63d2996).
⚠️ Report is 20 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #61792      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.76%   89.73%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         675      675              
  Lines      204674   204823     +149     
  Branches    39330    39367      +37     
==========================================
+ Hits       183716   183803      +87     
- Misses      13235    13296      +61     
- Partials     7723     7724       +1     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
lib/util.js	98.04% <100.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️

... and 51 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[RafaelGSS]

PTAL @brunocroh @nodejs/performance

[santigimeno]

LGTM with some questions.

[santigimeno]

Is this change necessary?

[santigimeno]

Why this change?

[santigimeno]

Why getting rid of the default values here?