Benchmark: tetetertete - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

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

Tests:

Native
const OBJECTIVES = { "BRAND_AWARENESS": { title: 'Brand awareness', description: 'Show your ads to people who are most likely to remember them.', }, "REACH": { title: 'Reach', description: 'Show your ads to the maximum number of people.', }, "POST_ENGAGEMENT": { title: 'Engagement', description: 'Get more Page likes, event responses, or post reacts, comments or shares.', }, "LEAD_GENERATION": { title: 'Lead Generation', description: 'Collect leads for your business or brand.', }, }; const OBJECTIVES_MAP = Object.entries(OBJECTIVES).map(([id, obj]) => ({ id, ...obj }));
Lodash Map
const OBJECTIVES = { "BRAND_AWARENESS": { title: 'Brand awareness', description: 'Show your ads to people who are most likely to remember them.', }, "REACH": { title: 'Reach', description: 'Show your ads to the maximum number of people.', }, "POST_ENGAGEMENT": { title: 'Engagement', description: 'Get more Page likes, event responses, or post reacts, comments or shares.', }, "LEAD_GENERATION": { title: 'Lead Generation', description: 'Collect leads for your business or brand.', }, }; const OBJECTIVES_MAP = _.map(OBJECTIVES, (value, id) => ({id, ...value}))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native
Lodash 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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test created on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark compares two approaches for iterating over an object in JavaScript: a native approach and a approach using the Lodash library.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition includes:

1. A script preparation code, which is empty in this case.
2. An HTML preparation code that includes a reference to the Lodash JavaScript library (version 4.17.5).
3. Two test cases:
	* "Native" benchmark, which tests the native JavaScript approach for iterating over an object.
	* "Lodash Map" benchmark, which tests the Lodash library's `map` function for iterating over an object.

**Test Cases**

1. **Native Benchmark**: This test case uses the built-in JavaScript `for...in` loop or the `forEach` method to iterate over the `OBJECTIVES_MAP` array.
	* The purpose of this benchmark is to measure the performance of the native JavaScript approach for iterating over an object.
2. **Lodash Map Benchmark**: This test case uses the Lodash library's `map` function to iterate over the `OBJECTIVES` object and create a new array (`OBJECTIVES_MAP`).
	* The purpose of this benchmark is to measure the performance of using the Lodash library for iterating over an object.

**Options Compared**

The two test cases compare:

1. **Native JavaScript Approach**: This approach uses built-in JavaScript methods (e.g., `for...in`, `forEach`) to iterate over an object.
2. **Lodash Library's Map Function**: This approach uses the Lodash library's `map` function to transform an object into a new array.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Native JavaScript Approach**
	* Pros:
		+ Lightweight and efficient, with no additional dependencies.
		+ Can be optimized for specific use cases (e.g., iterating over objects).
	* Cons:
		+ May require more code to achieve the same result as Lodash's `map` function.
2. **Lodash Library's Map Function**
	* Pros:
		+ Provides a convenient and well-tested way to perform common data transformations.
		+ Can be used for other purposes beyond iterating over objects (e.g., filtering, reducing).
	* Cons:
		+ Adds an additional dependency (the Lodash library) and may increase the overall size of the application.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors:

1. **Performance**: Native JavaScript approach might be faster for small to medium-sized iterations, while Lodash's `map` function might be slower due to the additional overhead of the library.
2. **Readability and Maintainability**: Native JavaScript approach might require more code to achieve the same result as Lodash's `map` function, which can make it harder to read and maintain.
3. **Reusability**: Lodash's `map` function can be reused for other purposes beyond iterating over objects, making it a more general-purpose solution.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for iterating over an object in JavaScript include:

1. **Array.prototype.forEach()**: A built-in method that iterates over an array.
2. **Array.prototype.reduce()**: A built-in method that reduces an array to a single value.
3. **Underscore.js functions**: Other utility functions from the Underscore.js library (e.g., `forEach`, `map`, `reduce`) can be used for iterating over objects.

Note: MeasureThat.net provides a wide range of benchmarks and test cases, allowing users to compare different approaches and choose the best one for their specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

tetetertete (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native vs Lodash Map

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native

Lodash Map

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):