Benchmark: Lodash _.sortBy vs _.orderBy

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}

var arr = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 100000; i++){
  arr.push({value:getRandomInt(100)});
}

Tests:

_.sortBy
_.sortBy(arr,"value");
_.orderBy
_.orderBy(arr,"value");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.sortBy
_.orderBy

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 dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and analyze the provided benchmark.

**Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two Lodash functions: _.sortBy and _.orderBy, which are used to sort an array of objects in JavaScript.

**Benchmark Definition JSON**

The benchmark definition consists of:

1. **Name**: The name of the benchmark, "Lodash _.sortBy vs _.orderBy".
2. **Script Preparation Code**: A script that generates a random array of 100,000 objects with a unique `value` property.
3. **Html Preparation Code**: Includes a reference to the Lodash library (version 4.17.5) via a CDN.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **_.sortBy**
2. **_.orderBy**

Each test case has a simple benchmark definition that calls one of these Lodash functions with the generated array as an argument.

**Libraries and Their Purposes**

In this benchmark, the following library is used:

* **Lodash**: A popular JavaScript utility library that provides a lot of functional programming helpers, including _.sortBy and _.orderBy. These functions are designed to work with arrays and objects in various ways.

**Special JS Features or Syntax (None)**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, two options are compared:

1. **_.sortBy**: Sorts the array by a specific property (`value`) in ascending order.
2. **_.orderBy**: Similar to _.sortBy, but it allows for a custom sorting function and can sort in descending order as well.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

Here's a brief overview of the pros and cons of each approach:

* **_.sortBy**:
	+ Pros: Simple and easy to use, with a clear intention (ascending order).
	+ Cons: Limited flexibility, as it only sorts in ascending order.
* **_.orderBy**:
	+ Pros: More flexible, allowing for sorting in both ascending and descending orders.
	+ Cons: Can be more complex to use, especially when comparing multiple properties.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between _.sortBy and _.orderBy, consider the specific requirements of your application:

* If you need a simple, straightforward sort that always sorts in ascending order, _.sortBy might be a good choice.
* If you need more flexibility and control over the sorting process, _.orderBy is likely a better option.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to _.sortBy and _.orderBy include:

* **Array.prototype.sort()**: The built-in JavaScript method for sorting arrays. This approach provides similar functionality but with less flexibility than Lodash's sort methods.
* Custom sorting functions or algorithms that don't rely on the Lodash library. These can be more efficient for specific use cases but require manual implementation of the sorting logic.

Keep in mind that this benchmark is focused specifically on comparing the performance of _.sortBy and _.orderBy, so other alternatives may not be directly comparable.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash _.sortBy vs _.orderBy (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.sortBy vs _.orderBy

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

_.sortBy

_.orderBy

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):