Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash vs es6 - filter then includes method3
(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 = new Array(100000).fill().map((v, i) => i);
Tests:
lodash filter then includes method
var result = _.chain(array).map((v) => v + 1) .filter((v) => v % 3 === 0) .slice(0, 10).value();
es6 filter then includes method
var result = array.map((v) => v + 1) .filter((v) => v % 3 === 0) .slice(0, 10);
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 dive into the details of the provided JSON benchmark. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to filtering and including elements in an array: using Lodash's `filter` and `includes` methods, versus using only JavaScript's native `filter` method (with a custom implementation that includes checking for membership in an array). **Options Compared** The options being compared are: 1. **Lodash's `filter` and `includes` methods**: These methods are used to filter elements based on a condition and check if an element is present in the original array, respectively. 2. **JavaScript's native `filter` method (with custom implementation)**: This approach uses only JavaScript's built-in `filter` method to achieve similar functionality as Lodash's `includes` method. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** **Lodash's `filter` and `includes` methods** Pros: * Shorter code (less boilerplate) * Easier to read and maintain * Provides additional features like memoization ( caching) Cons: * Additional overhead due to the library being included * May not be suitable for smaller projects or performance-critical applications **JavaScript's native `filter` method (with custom implementation)** Pros: * No additional overhead from an external library * Can be optimized for specific use cases Cons: * Longer code (more boilerplate) * Requires more manual effort to implement and maintain **Other Considerations** When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors: * Project size and complexity: For smaller projects, Lodash's `filter` and `includes` methods might be overkill. For larger projects or performance-critical applications, the custom implementation might be a better choice. * Performance requirements: If speed is critical, the custom implementation might provide better performance. * Readability and maintainability: The shorter code with Lodash's methods can make it easier to read and understand the codebase. **Library Used (Lodash)** Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of small, reusable functions. In this case, `filter` and `includes` are used as part of the Lodash chain method (`_.chain`). The purpose of these methods is to provide concise and readable ways to filter and check elements in arrays. **Special JS Feature/Syntax (None)** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
lodash v native filter
lodash vs es6 - filter then includes method
lodash vs es6 - filter then includes method4
Array.prototype.filter vs Lodash 4.17.5 filter
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?