Benchmark: lodash forEach vs for i loop123123123

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var values = {aa:{a: 30310}, bb:{b: 100303}, cc:{c: 3040494}}

Tests:

lodash.forEach
var count = 0; _.forEach(values, function(v,i) { if (v.a != null) { count++; } })
native
var count = 0; for (var i = 0; i < values.length; i++) { if (values[i].a != null) { count++; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.forEach
native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 8 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Android 13; Mobile; rv:142.0) Gecko/142.0 Firefox/142.0

Browser/OS: Firefox Mobile 142 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash.forEach	5065384.5 Ops/sec
native	940238720.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark data and explain what's being tested, compared, and what are the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to iterate over an object: `lodash.forEach` and a native `for` loop. The benchmark is designed to measure which approach is faster on various JavaScript engines.

**Options Compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **`lodash.forEach`**: A utility function from the Lodash library, which provides a way to iterate over objects using an iterator.
2. **Native `for` loop**: A traditional loop structure that uses a counter variable (`i`) to iterate over the object's properties.

**Pros and Cons**

### Lodash `forEach`

Pros:

* More concise code
* Easy to read and maintain
* Works with various data structures, not just objects

Cons:

* Requires an additional library (Lodash) to be included in the benchmark
* May have performance overhead due to the addition of another function call
* Can lead to slower performance if not optimized correctly

### Native `for` loop

Pros:

* No additional libraries are required
* Can be optimized for performance by avoiding unnecessary function calls and iterations
* Typically faster than Lodash functions when dealing with large datasets

Cons:

* More verbose code compared to Lodash `forEach`
* Requires manual management of the iteration counter variable (`i`)

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks such as array manipulation, object transformation, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash is used to provide the `forEach` function, which allows users to iterate over objects using an iterator.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None are mentioned in this specific benchmark data. However, it's worth noting that modern JavaScript engines have introduced features like `for...of` loops, which can simplify iteration over arrays and other data structures.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative libraries or approaches to iterate over objects, here are a few options:

1. **`Array.prototype.forEach()`**: A built-in function in modern browsers that allows iterating over arrays.
2. **`for...of` loops**: Introduced in ECMAScript 2015, these loops provide a concise way to iterate over arrays and other data structures.
3. **Other utility libraries**: Other popular libraries like Underscore.js or Ramda provide similar iteration functions that can be used in benchmarks.

Keep in mind that the choice of library or approach ultimately depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

lodash forEach vs for i loop123123123 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.forEach vs native

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.forEach

native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):