Benchmark: lodash.keys vs Object.keys

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var value = {a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494}

Tests:

lodash.keys
_.keys({a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494})
native
Object.keys({a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494})

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.keys
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to understand what is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition describes two different approaches to retrieve the keys of an object:

1. `_.keys({a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494})` - This uses the Lodash library (`lodash.keys`) to extract the keys from the object.
2. `Object.keys({a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494})` - This uses the built-in JavaScript `Object.keys()` method to extract the keys from the object.

**Options Compared**

The two approaches being compared are:

* Using a library (Lodash) to achieve the same result as the native JavaScript method.
* The performance difference between using a library versus relying on the native JavaScript implementation.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Using Lodash (`_.keys({a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494})`)**
	* Pros:
		+ Can be used in any environment where JavaScript is supported.
		+ May provide a more consistent and reliable way to extract keys from objects.
	* Cons:
		+ Adds an additional dependency (the Lodash library) that needs to be included in the benchmark.
		+ May introduce overhead due to the size of the library.
2. **Using Native JavaScript (`Object.keys({a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494})`)**
	* Pros:
		+ No additional dependencies needed.
		+ Can be faster since it's a native implementation.
	* Cons:
		+ May not work in all environments where JavaScript is supported (e.g., older browsers).
		+ Performance can vary depending on the browser and environment.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, Lodash is used for its `keys` function. Lodash is a popular utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and object manipulation. In this case, it's being used specifically to extract keys from objects.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in these benchmark definitions. They're using standard JavaScript language and libraries (Lodash).

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to test alternative approaches for extracting object keys, some other options could be:

* Using a different library like `underscore` or `moment`
* Implementing the key extraction logic yourself
* Testing alternative browser-specific implementations (e.g., using `chrome.devtools.network` API)

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives would require significant changes to the benchmark definition and test setup.

Related benchmarks:

lodash.keys vs Object.keys (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.keys vs native

Created: 9 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.keys

native

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):