Benchmark: lodash forEach vs for i loop vs native forEach

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.17.15/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var values = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}]

Tests:

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

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 8 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 8 runs

native forEach

44.0M/s

native for

32.5M/s

lodash.forEach

15.8M/s

Fastest: native forEach (2.8x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ native forEach: 43,974,404 ops/sec
• native for: 32,468,874 ops/sec
• lodash.forEach: 15,800,462 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.forEach
native for
native forEach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/18.5 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 18 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

native for

138.9M/s

native forEach

74.8M/s

lodash.forEach

66.6M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ native for	138,886,976 Ops/sec
native forEach	74,817,680 Ops/sec
lodash.forEach	66,557,124 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 definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of three different approaches:

1. **Lodash `forEach`**: A popular JavaScript utility library that provides a functional programming style implementation of the `forEach` method.
2. **Native `for` loop**: The built-in `for` loop in JavaScript, which uses an index variable to iterate over an array.
3. **Native `forEach` method**: Another built-in JavaScript method for iterating over arrays.

**Options Being Compared**

The options being compared are the execution time and performance of each approach when used to iterate over a sample dataset (`values`) and increment a counter (`count`) whenever the value has a non-null `a` property. The benchmark measures the number of executions per second, which represents the frequency at which the loop iterates.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Lodash `forEach`**:
	+ Pros: Provides a concise and expressive way to iterate over arrays, eliminating the need for manual indexing.
	+ Cons: May incur additional overhead due to the use of an external library and the creation of a new scope.
* **Native `for` loop**:
	+ Pros: Optimized for performance and can be faster than the Lodash implementation.
	+ Cons: Requires manual indexing, which can lead to errors if not implemented correctly.
* **Native `forEach` method**:
	+ Pros: Similar to the Lodash implementation in terms of syntax and expressiveness.
	+ Cons: May have similar overhead as the Lodash implementation due to its internal workings.

**Library Used**

The benchmark uses the Lodash library, which provides a functional programming style implementation of the `forEach` method. The specific version used is 4.17.15.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

None mentioned in the provided code snippets.

**Benchmark Preparation Code and Individual Test Cases**

The preparation code creates an array (`values`) with three objects containing non-null `a` properties, and then uses each of the three approaches to iterate over this array, incrementing a counter. The individual test cases are:

1. Lodash `forEach`
2. Native `for` loop
3. Native `forEach` method

**Latest Benchmark Result**

The latest result shows that the native `forEach` method performs best, followed by the native `for` loop, and then the Lodash implementation.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to compare with these approaches could be:

* Using a custom-made iterator function to iterate over the array
* Comparing the performance of different JavaScript engines (e.g., V8, SpiderMonkey)
* Testing the performance of other libraries or frameworks that provide similar iteration methods (e.g., React, Angular)

However, for a basic benchmark like this one, native implementations are often the most suitable options.

lodash forEach vs for i loop vs native forEach (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `lodash.forEach vs native for vs native forEach`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

lodash.forEach

native for

native forEach

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 8 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 8 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

lodash forEach vs for i loop vs native forEach (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: lodash.forEach vs native for vs native forEach

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

lodash.forEach

native for

native forEach

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 8 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 8 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `lodash.forEach vs native for vs native forEach`