Benchmark: Lodash.js wrapper vs js native

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var max1 = 100000; // 100,000 (100 Thousand)
var max2 = 10000000; // 10,000,000 (10 Million)
var max3 = 100000000; // 100,000,000 (100 Million)

var arr1 = [];
//for (var i = 0; i <= max1; i++) { arr1.push(i); }

var arr2 = [];
for (var i = 0; i <= max2; i++) { arr2.push(i); }

var arr3 = [];
//for (var i = 0; i <= max3; i++) { arr3.push(i); }

Tests:

Native
arr2 .map((element) => element ** 2) .map((element) => element -10) .filter((element) => element % 2 === 0) .map((element) => `result is ${element}`);
Lodash.js chained wrapper
_(arr2) .map((element) => element ** 2) .map((element) => element -10) .filter((element) => element % 2 === 0) .map((element) => `result is ${element}`) .value();

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native
Lodash.js chained wrapper

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:

1. **Chained Native Methods**: This approach uses native JavaScript methods `map()`, `filter()`, and `toString()` to process an array.
2. **Lodash.js Chained Wrapper**: This approach uses the Lodash library's chainable methods `map()`, `filter()`, and `toString()` to process an array.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches for different array sizes:

* `max1`: 100,000 elements
* `max2`: 10,000,000 elements
* `max3`: 100,000,000 elements

**Pros and Cons**

**Chained Native Methods**

Pros:

* No external library dependencies
* Potential for better optimization by the JavaScript engine

Cons:

* Can be slower due to overhead of method calls and array operations
* May not perform as well with large arrays or complex operations

**Lodash.js Chained Wrapper**

Pros:

* Provides a more readable and maintainable code structure
* Optimized for performance and ease of use

Cons:

* Requires an external library dependency (Lodash)
* May have overhead due to the library's initialization and garbage collection

**Other Considerations**

The benchmark also considers the following factors:

* **Browser**: The results are measured in a Firefox 91 browser running on Linux.
* **Device Platform**: The test is run on a desktop device.

**Library: Lodash.js**

Lodash.js is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, string manipulation, and data transformation. In this benchmark, Lodash's `map()`, `filter()`, and `toString()` methods are used to process an array.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There is no specific special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing the performance of two different approaches using standard JavaScript methods.

If you're interested in exploring other alternatives, some potential options include:

* Using a different library like Underscore.js or Ramda
* Implementing custom array operations for better optimization
* Using a just-in-time (JIT) compiler to optimize JavaScript code

Keep in mind that the choice of approach will depend on the specific requirements and constraints of your project.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.js wrapper vs js native (version: 0)

Comparing performance of chained native map and filter operations against chained lodash wrapper methods

Comparing performance of: Native vs Lodash.js chained wrapper

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native

Lodash.js chained wrapper

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):