Benchmark: debounce ramda vs. lodash

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.27.1/ramda.min.js'></script>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var debounceR = R.curry((config, fn) => {
    const { delay, initialInstant = false } = (R.is(Number, config)
        ? { delay: config }
        : config);
    let timer = null;
    let firstCall = false;
    return (...args) => new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
        const safeCall = () => {
            try {
                resolve(fn.apply(window, args));
            }
            catch (e) {
                reject(e);
            }
        };
        if (!firstCall) {
            firstCall = true;
            if (initialInstant) {
                safeCall();
                return;
            }
        }
        if (!R.isNil(timer)) {
            clearTimeout(timer);
        }
        timer = setTimeout(safeCall, delay);
    });
});


var debounceV = (func, timeout) => {
  let timer;
  return (...args) => {
    clearTimeout(timer);
    timer = setTimeout(() => { func.apply(this, args); }, timeout);
  };
}

var handler = () => {};

Tests:

ramda
debounceR({delay: 0}, handler)
lodash
_.debounce(handler, 0)

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

lodash

23.9M/s

ramda

17.2M/s

Fastest: lodash (1.4x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ lodash: 23,929,134 ops/sec
• ramda: 17,156,624 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
ramda
lodash

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 6 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/145.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/145.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 145 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

lodash

10.3M/s

ramda

7.4M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ lodash	10,295,509 Ops/sec
ramda	7,383,790 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Explanation**

The provided benchmark tests the performance of two debounce functions: `debounceR` (from Ramda) and `debounceV` (a custom implementation). Debounce is a function that limits the execution of another function to a specific time interval, preventing it from being called too frequently.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Ramda's `debounceR`**: This function uses the Ramda library to implement debounce. It takes two arguments: a configuration object and a handler function. The configuration object can specify the delay time and whether the initial instant should be executed immediately.
2. **Custom `debounceV` implementation**: This is a simple, non-library-based implementation of debounce. It also takes two arguments: a function to execute and a timeout.

**Pros and Cons**

**Ramda's `debounceR`**:

Pros:

* Uses the Ramda library, which provides functional programming utilities.
* Allows for more configuration options (delay time and initial instant).

Cons:

* Adds overhead due to the use of an external library.
* May not be suitable for projects that require a lightweight implementation.

**Custom `debounceV` implementation**:

Pros:

* Lightweight and easy to understand.
* Can be optimized for specific use cases.

Cons:

* Limited configuration options (only timeout).
* May not be as performant as the Ramda implementation due to the lack of optimization.

**Library: Lodash**

The benchmark also tests `_.debounce` from Lodash. This function is similar to Ramda's `debounceR`, but with a simpler API and no configuration object.

**Pros and Cons**

* _.debounce:
	+ Simple and easy to use.
	+ Fast execution time due to its optimized implementation.
	+ Limited configuration options (only timeout).
	+ Adds overhead due to the use of an external library.

**Special JS Feature: `window`**

The custom implementation uses `window` as the context for the handler function. This is a global object in JavaScript that represents the window or browser environment. In this case, it's used to execute the handler function with the correct context.

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark is run on a single device (Chrome 127) and platform (Desktop, Windows). This may not be representative of all possible environments.
* The execution per second value indicates how many times the benchmark function was executed in one second. A higher value typically indicates better performance.
* The raw UA string includes additional information about the browser, version, and device type.

**Alternatives**

* Other debounce libraries or implementations exist, such as `lodash-debounce`, `jquery-debounce`, or custom implementations like the one used in this benchmark.
* Alternative approaches to debouncing include using a timer-based approach or a more complex algorithm that takes into account multiple factors (e.g., user interaction, network latency).

debounce ramda vs. lodash (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `ramda vs lodash`

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

ramda

lodash

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

debounce ramda vs. lodash (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: ramda vs lodash

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

ramda

lodash

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 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: `ramda vs lodash`