Benchmark: Lodash _.first vs array[0]

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.11/lodash.core.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var names = ["first", "middle", "last", "suffix"];

Tests:

_.first
const firstName = _.first(names)
JS
const firstName = names[0]

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 17 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 17 runs

30.6M/s

_.first

11.2M/s

Fastest: JS (2.7x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ JS: 30,597,360 ops/sec
• _.first: 11,239,712 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.first
JS

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

159.4M/s

_.first

132.8M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ JS	159,356,208 Ops/sec
_.first	132,781,328 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, compared, and what pros/cons come with each approach.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition is a JSON object that provides metadata about the test. It contains:

* `Name`: The name of the benchmark.
* `Description`: A brief description of the test (in this case, it's empty).
* `Script Preparation Code`: A JavaScript code snippet that prepares the environment for the test. In this case, it defines an array `names` with four string elements: `"first"`, `"middle"`, `"last"`, and `"suffix"`.
* `Html Preparation Code`: An HTML snippet that includes a CDN link to Lodash library version 4.17.11.

**Individual Test Cases**

The benchmark consists of two test cases:

1. **`.first`**: This test case uses the `_first` function from Lodash, which takes an array and returns the first element.
2. **"JS"`: This test case uses direct indexing (`names[0]`) to access the first element of the `names` array.

**Library**

In this benchmark, the Lodash library is used. Specifically, it provides the `_first` function that is used in the first test case.

The purpose of Lodash is to provide a collection of useful JavaScript functions and utilities that can be reused in various projects. In this case, the `_first` function simplifies accessing the first element of an array by abstracting away the indexing operation.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There doesn't appear to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in these benchmark cases.

**Pros/Cons of Approaches**

Here's a brief analysis of each approach:

* **`.first`**: Using Lodash's `_first` function has the advantage of providing a standardized and tested way to access array elements. However, it may introduce additional overhead due to the function call and potential memory allocation.
* **"JS"`: Direct indexing (`names[0]`) is a simple and lightweight approach that avoids any external dependencies. It can be faster since it doesn't involve a function call and potentially less overhead.

The pros of direct indexing are:

* Faster execution
* Less overhead due to no function call

However, the cons are:

* More prone to errors if the array index is out of bounds
* No standardization or testing guarantees

In contrast, using `_first` provides:

* Standardized and tested access to array elements
* Error protection against invalid array indices
* Potential for performance optimization through caching or memoization (not shown in this benchmark)

**Other Alternatives**

If Lodash were not an option, other alternatives could include:

* Using the `Array.prototype[0]` method (e.g., `names[0]`)
* Implementing a custom function to access array elements

Keep in mind that these alternatives would likely introduce additional overhead or errors, so it's worth considering the trade-offs when choosing an approach.

Lodash _.first vs array[0] (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `_.first vs JS`

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

_.first

JS

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 17 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 17 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Lodash _.first vs array[0] (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.first vs JS

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

_.first

JS

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 17 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 17 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `_.first vs JS`