Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash map vs native map with check
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lodash vs native
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var data = Array(1000000).fill({ a: 'a', b: 1 });
Tests:
lodash
_.map(data, x => `${x.a}_${x.b}`)
native
(data || []).map(x => `${x.a}_${x.b}`)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lodash
native
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
No previous run results
This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one
to run it!
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark is comparing two approaches: using Lodash's `map` function to transform an array of objects, versus using JavaScript's native `map` function (also known as Array.prototype.map()) without checking for null or undefined values in the array. **Options Compared** * Lodash's `map` function * Native JavaScript `map` function **Pros and Cons** * **Lodash's `map` function**: Pros: + Provides a more concise and readable code syntax. + Can handle cases where the input array might be null or undefined, as it will return an empty array instead of throwing an error. + Often used in production code, so if Lodash is included in your project, this benchmark may reflect how well your application performs with that library. * **Native JavaScript `map` function**: Pros: + Faster and more efficient than the Lodash version, as it doesn't incur the overhead of a library call. + Provides direct access to browser performance metrics. Cons: + More verbose code syntax can lead to slower execution times due to parsing and interpretation. * No explicit null checks are performed in native JavaScript `map`, which might cause issues if the input array is not as expected. **Library: Lodash** Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for various tasks, such as string manipulation, array and object transformations, functional programming, and more. The `map` function in Lodash is designed to be concise and readable while still being efficient. In this benchmark, the `map` function from Lodash is used to transform an array of objects into a new array with transformed values. **Special JS Feature: No special features are mentioned** No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in this benchmark. The code snippets provided by both Lodash and native JavaScript only use standard JavaScript syntax. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring other approaches to transform arrays of objects, consider the following alternatives: * Using `forEach` with callback functions instead of `map`. * Implementing a custom array transformation loop. * Using libraries like jQuery or React that provide similar functionality. However, keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce performance overhead and changes to your codebase. In conclusion, this benchmark compares two approaches for transforming arrays of objects: using Lodash's `map` function versus the native JavaScript `map` function. The results will help you understand which approach performs better on your specific hardware configuration.
Related benchmarks:
lodash map vs native map (v2)
lodash map vs native map (v4)
lodash map vs native map wraig0
native map vs lodash map on large array
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?