Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash prop with native map vs deconstruct with native map
(version: 0)
lodash prop with native map vs deconstruct with native map
Comparing performance of:
lodash prop with native map vs deconstruct with native map
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>
Script Preparation code:
var array = [{ 'id' : '0xD'}]
Tests:
lodash prop with native map
array.map(_.property('id'))
deconstruct with native map
array.map(({id}) => id)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lodash prop with native map
deconstruct with native map
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):
I'd be happy to explain the benchmark. The test case is comparing two approaches to extract a value from an object in an array: using Lodash's `prop` function and the `native map` approach, which uses destructuring. **Lodash `prop` function** Lodash is a popular JavaScript library that provides a variety of utility functions. The `prop` function is used to access a property of an object. In this case, it's being used with the `_.property('id')` syntax, which returns an accessor function that can be used to extract the value from each object in the array. **Native map approach (deconstructing)** The native map approach uses destructuring to extract the value directly from each object in the array. The syntax `{ id } => id` is used, where `id` is a property of the object being processed. Now, let's discuss the pros and cons of these approaches: **Pros of using Lodash `prop` function:** 1. **Readability**: The code is more concise and readable, as the intent is explicitly stated. 2. **Reusability**: The accessor function returned by `_prop` can be reused in other parts of the codebase. **Cons of using Lodash `prop` function:** 1. **Performance overhead**: Using a library like Lodash introduces additional overhead due to the dynamic imports and method calls. 2. **Code size**: The final compiled code will be larger, which may impact performance or file size limitations. **Pros of native map approach (deconstructing):** 1. **Performance**: This approach is generally faster, as it avoids the overhead of a library function call. 2. **No additional dependencies**: No extra libraries are required, making it easier to optimize for smaller code sizes. **Cons of native map approach:** 1. **Readability**: The code may be less readable, as the intent is not explicitly stated in the syntax. 2. **Less reusable**: This approach can't be easily reused without re-declaring the same logic elsewhere. Other alternatives: * Using a library like jQuery or another utility library with similar functionality to Lodash. * Implementing a custom accessor function directly in the codebase, avoiding any external dependencies. * Optimizing for performance by using other techniques, such as caching or memoization, around the extraction operation. In terms of special JS features or syntax, the test case uses destructuring (the `{ id } => id` syntax), which is a modern JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015. This feature allows for concise and expressive way to extract values from objects.
Related benchmarks:
Array.prototype.map vs Lodash map
lodash _.map vs native map
lodash _.map vs native map true version
Lodash.js isEmpty vs Native on Map
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?