Benchmark: Rambdax vs Lodash

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.20/lodash.min.js'></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/rambdax/7.1.0/rambdax.umd.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var users = [
  { 'user': 'joey',  'age': 32 },
  { 'user': 'ross',    'age': 41 },
  { 'user': 'chandler', 'age': 39 }
];

Tests:

Rambdax
const reR = R.find(x => x.age > 30, users);
Lodash
const reL = _.find(users, x => x.age > 30);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Rambdax
Lodash

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll explain the benchmark in a detailed and easy-to-understand manner.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two JavaScript libraries, Rambdax and Lodash, on the same test cases. The goal is to determine which library performs better in terms of execution speed.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. `Rambdax`: The first test case uses Rambdax's `find` function to filter an array of objects based on a condition (age > 30). The array is created as follows: `{ 'user': 'joey', 'age': 32 }`, `{ 'user': 'ross', 'age': 41 }`, and `{ 'user': 'chandler', 'age': 39 }`.
2. `Lodash`: The second test case uses Lodash's `find` function to filter the same array of objects based on the same condition (age > 30). However, this time, the `_.find` function is used instead.

**Library and Purpose**

* **Rambdax**: Rambdax is a lightweight JavaScript library for functional programming. Its primary purpose is to provide a concise and expressive way to write functional code.
* **Lodash**: Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of helper functions for common tasks, such as array manipulation, string manipulation, and more.

**Comparison**

The benchmark compares the execution speed of Rambdax's `find` function with Lodash's `_.find` function on both test cases. The results are:

* **Rambdax**: 9919955 executions per second (FPS)
* **Lodash**: 6900617 FPS

**Options and Considerations**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Rambdax's `find` function**: This implementation is likely to be more concise and expressive, but it may also be less efficient due to the overhead of creating a closure.
2. **Lodash's `_.find` function**: This implementation is more traditional and widely used, but it may require more boilerplate code and be less readable.

Pros and Cons:

* Rambdax's `find` function:
	+ Pros: More concise, expressive, and potentially easier to read.
	+ Cons: May be less efficient due to closure creation overhead.
* Lodash's `_.find` function:
	+ Pros: Widely used, well-tested, and more familiar to developers.
	+ Cons: Requires more boilerplate code and may be less readable.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between Rambdax and Lodash, consider the trade-offs between conciseness, readability, and performance. If you prioritize these factors, Rambdax might be a better choice. However, if you prefer a more traditional and widely-used approach with more familiar functionality, Lodash might be a better fit.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to Rambdax and Lodash include:

* **Underscore.js**: Another popular JavaScript utility library that provides similar functionality to Lodash.
* **Pareto**: A lightweight alternative to Rambdax that provides a similar set of functional programming utilities.
* **Ramda**: A comprehensive functional programming library for JavaScript that provides many of the same features as Rambdax and Lodash.

Related benchmarks:

Rambdax vs Lodash (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Rambdax vs Lodash

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Rambdax

Lodash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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