Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash vs es6 - filter then includes method2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lodash filter then includes method vs es6 filter then includes method
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var array = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9];
Tests:
lodash filter then includes method
var result = _.chain(array).filter(n => n > 5).includes(5).value();
es6 filter then includes method
var result = array.filter(n => n > 5).includes(5);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lodash filter then includes method
es6 filter then includes method
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark JSON and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark is comparing two approaches: 1. Using Lodash (`_.chain(array).filter(n => n > 5).includes(5).value();`) - This approach uses a utility library called Lodash, which provides a set of functional programming helpers. 2. Native JavaScript implementation (`array.filter(n => n > 5).includes(5);`) - This approach uses only built-in JavaScript features. **Options Compared** The benchmark is comparing two options: * **Lodash**: Uses the popular Lodash library to chain together methods for filtering and includes. * **Native JavaScript**: Uses native JavaScript features, such as `Array.prototype.filter()` and `Array.prototype.includes()`, to achieve the same result. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** * **Lodash:** + Pros: - Easier to read and maintain, thanks to the concise syntax provided by Lodash. - More expressive code, allowing for a clearer understanding of intent. + Cons: - Adds overhead due to the library's presence and potential performance impact. * **Native JavaScript:** + Pros: - No additional dependencies or overhead, making it a lighter option. - Can be optimized by the browser or runtime environment. + Cons: - Requires more boilerplate code and explicit typing, which can make it harder to read and maintain. **Library: Lodash** Lodash is a popular JavaScript library that provides a set of functional programming helpers. Its purpose is to simplify common tasks by providing a concise syntax for various operations, such as filtering, mapping, reducing, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash is used to chain together the `filter()` and `includes()` methods. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. Both approaches use standard JavaScript features that are widely supported across different browsers and environments. **Other Alternatives** If you're interested in exploring other options, consider: * **Underscore.js**: Another popular utility library similar to Lodash. * **Ramda**: A functional programming library for JavaScript that provides a set of higher-order functions. * **Native JavaScript alternatives**: There are various approaches to implementing filtering and includes operations using only native JavaScript features, such as `Array.prototype.map()`, `Array.prototype.reduce()`, or using `Set` data structures. Keep in mind that each approach has its own trade-offs and performance characteristics. The benchmark results will help you understand the relative performance of each option on your specific use case.
Related benchmarks:
lodash vs es6 - filter then includes method
lodash vs es6 - filter then includes method4
Array.prototype.filter vs Lodash 4.17.5 filter
Speed Test : _.filter vs array filter
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?