Benchmark: lodash isNil vs native js

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var a = null;
var b = undefined;
var c = NaN;
var d = false;
var e = 'a';
var f = 0;

Tests:

lodash
_.isNil(a); _.isNil(b); _.isNil(c); _.isNil(d); _.isNil(e); _.isNil(f);
native
a == null; b == null; d == null; e == null; f == null;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash
native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/132.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/132.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 132 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash	105052152.0 Ops/sec
native	162049488.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested, compared, and their pros/cons.

**What is being tested?**

The test compares two approaches to check if a value is null or undefined in JavaScript:

1. **Lodash (specifically, `_.isNil` function)**: This is a utility function from the popular JavaScript library Lodash that checks if an object is null, undefined, or has a value of zero (NaN).
2. **Native JavaScript**: The native approach uses the `== null` operator to check if a variable is null or undefined.

**Options compared**

The test case "native" uses the native JavaScript approach, which directly compares the variable with `null`. In contrast, the test case "lodash" uses the Lodash library's `_.isNil` function.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Native JavaScript (`== null` operator)**:
	* Pros:
		+ Fastest execution time
		+ Most efficient way to check for null or undefined values in JavaScript
		+ Wide support across browsers and platforms
	* Cons:
		+ Can be brittle if the variable's value is changed unexpectedly (e.g., due to a bug in the code)
2. **Lodash (`_.isNil` function)**:
	* Pros:
		+ Provides an explicit way to check for null or undefined values, making the code more readable
		+ Can handle edge cases and NaN values
	* Cons:
		+ Slower execution time compared to native JavaScript
		+ Requires including the Lodash library in the test environment

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for common tasks, such as array manipulation, string formatting, and more. In this specific case, `_.isNil` checks if an object is null, undefined, or has a value of zero (NaN).

**Special JS feature/syntax: None mentioned**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to implement the native approach using only vanilla JavaScript without any libraries, you could use the following expression:

```javascript
if (a === null || a === undefined) {
  // handle null or undefined value
}
```

Alternatively, if you wanted to use a different library for this task, you might consider other options like `===` and `Object.is()`, but these are not as commonly used or well-supported as the native approach.

Overall, the test is primarily focused on comparing the performance of checking for null or undefined values in JavaScript using Lodash versus the native approach.

Related benchmarks:

lodash isNil vs native js (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash vs native

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash

native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):