Benchmark: lodash gonna crazy

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var arrLength = 150000;
var arr = new Array(arrLength).fill().map((_, idx) => ({ id: idx }));
var foo = Math.floor(Math.random() * arrLength);

Tests:

findIndex
const userIdx = arr.findIndex(user => user.id === foo);
lodash findindex
const userIdx = _.findIndex(arr, { id: foo });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
findIndex
lodash findindex

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 JSON and explain what's being tested, the options compared, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a script that creates an array `arr` with 150,000 elements, each containing an `id` property. It then generates a random index `foo` between 0 and 149,999 using the `Math.random()` function. This script is used to test the performance of finding an element in an array.

**Options Compared**

There are two options compared:

1. **Native JavaScript (findIndex)**: The native JavaScript `findIndex()` method is used to find the index of a specific element in the array.
2. **Lodash (findIndex)**: The Lodash library's `findIndex()` function is used to achieve the same result.

**Pros and Cons**

### Native JavaScript (findIndex)

Pros:

* Built-in functionality, no external dependencies
* Simple and lightweight implementation

Cons:

* May not be as efficient as specialized libraries like Lodash for large datasets
* May have performance issues on older browsers or devices with limited resources

### Lodash (findIndex)

Pros:

* Optimized for performance and scalability
* Supports various iteration modes, including strict equality checks
* Wide adoption and community support

Cons:

* External dependency, may slow down initial page load
* Steeper learning curve due to the need to include an external library

**Other Considerations**

* **Browser-specific optimizations**: Some browsers, like Chrome, provide optimized implementations of `findIndex()` that can result in significant performance improvements.
* **Device and platform variations**: The benchmark results are specific to a desktop browser on macOS 10.15.7. Testing on different devices, platforms, or browsers may yield different results due to hardware and software differences.

**Library Used (Lodash)**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and object manipulation. The `findIndex()` function is one of the many utility functions provided by Lodash.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned in this benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some newer JavaScript features like arrow functions (used in the script preparation code) are not supported in older browsers or environments.

Related benchmarks:

lodash gonna crazy (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: findIndex vs lodash findindex

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

findIndex

lodash findindex

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):