Benchmark: ramda toPairs vs. Object.entries

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {a: 1, b: 2, c: 3};

Tests:

vanila
Object.entries(obj);
ramda
R.toPairs(obj);

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

ramda

8.7M/s

vanila

5.9M/s

Fastest: ramda (1.5x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ ramda: 8,734,892 ops/sec
• vanila: 5,902,960 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
vanila
ramda

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:133.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/133.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 133 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

vanila

12.4M/s

ramda

11.7M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ vanila	12,354,629 Ops/sec
ramda	11,721,999 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in this benchmark.

**What is being compared?**

The test compares the performance of two approaches to iterate over an object:

1. **Vanilla JavaScript**: Using `Object.entries()` method, which returns an array of an object's key-value pairs.
2. **Ramda library**: Using `R.toPairs()` function from the Ramda library, which also returns an array of key-value pairs.

**Options compared**

In this benchmark, we have two options being compared:

* Vanilla JavaScript using `Object.entries()`
* Ramda library using `R.toPairs()`

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Vanilla JavaScript**: Advantages:
	* Built-in method in the browser's API.
	* Typically faster than a library call since it doesn't involve an extra function call.
2. **Ramda library**: Advantages:
	* Provides a more functional programming style, which might make the code easier to read and maintain.
	* Can be useful for other tasks beyond just iterating over objects.

However, Ramda's `R.toPairs()` method has some drawbacks:

1. The function call introduces an extra overhead compared to using the built-in `Object.entries()` method.
2. Requires including a library (Ramda) which might not be necessary for a simple benchmark like this one.

**Other considerations**

There are no special JS features or syntax used in this benchmark.

**Library and purpose**

In this case, Ramda is a functional programming library that provides various utilities for working with data structures like arrays, objects, etc. The `R.toPairs()` function is specifically designed to convert an object into an array of key-value pairs, making it a convenient alternative to using `Object.entries()`. However, in this benchmark, the focus is on comparing performance between these two approaches.

**Alternative approaches**

In addition to the vanilla JavaScript approach and the Ramda library approach, other possible alternatives could be:

* Using a loop with `for...in` or `forEach()` method.
* Using a library like Lodash (which has a similar function to `R.toPairs()`) or Underscore.js.

However, these alternative approaches are likely to have similar performance characteristics to the Ramda library approach due to the inherent overhead of using an extra function call or iterating over an array.

Overall, this benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two specific approaches: vanilla JavaScript's `Object.entries()` method and Ramda's `R.toPairs()` function.

ramda toPairs vs. Object.entries (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `vanila vs ramda`

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

vanila

ramda

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

ramda toPairs vs. Object.entries (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: vanila vs ramda

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

vanila

ramda

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 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: `vanila vs ramda`