Benchmark: debounce ramda vs underscore

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/underscore.js/1.13.1/underscore-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)
underscore
_.debounce(handler, 0)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ramda
underscore

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 dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two JavaScript debouncing functions: `debounceR` from Ramda and `debounceV` from a custom implementation. The test cases are designed to measure the execution speed of each function under different conditions.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Ramda's debounceR**: This is a higher-order function that takes an optional configuration object with a `delay` property. It returns another function that debounces the input function by a specified delay.
2. **Custom implementation's debounceV**: This is a simple, lower-level implementation of debouncing that uses a closure to keep track of the timer and clear previous timers.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Ramda's debounceR**: Pros:
	+ Higher-order function provides more flexibility and composability.
	+ Returns a new function, making it easier to chain debouncing together.
	+ Uses Ramda's functional programming principles for readability and maintainability.
* Cons:
	+ Requires an additional configuration object with `delay` property.
	+ May be overkill for simple use cases where the default behavior is sufficient.

* **Custom implementation's debounceV**: Pros:
	+ Simple and lightweight, making it suitable for resource-constrained environments.
	+ Easy to understand and implement.
	+ Does not require an additional configuration object.
* Cons:
	+ Lower-level implementation that requires more manual management of timers.
	+ Less flexible than Ramda's approach.

**Library: Underscore.js**

The benchmark uses Underscore.js, a popular JavaScript utility library. The `_.debounce` function is used in the second test case to compare with Ramda's `debounceR`. Underscore.js provides a simple and efficient way to debounce functions, making it a good choice for this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark that would affect the understanding of the code. However, it's worth noting that the use of `R.is` from Ramda is a functional programming concept that may not be immediately familiar to all developers.

**Alternative Implementations**

Other alternatives for debouncing functions include:

* Lodash.js: Provides a similar `debounce` function as Underscore.js.
* Moment.js: Offers a more robust debouncing implementation, especially for date and time-related use cases.
* Vanilla JavaScript implementations: There are several simple and efficient vanilla JavaScript implementations of debouncing functions available online.

In summary, the benchmark compares two debouncing functions from different libraries (Ramda and custom implementation) to assess their performance. The options compared have pros and cons in terms of flexibility, readability, and resource usage.

Related benchmarks:

debounce ramda vs underscore (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ramda vs underscore

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ramda

underscore

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):