Benchmark: lodash forEach vs pure for i loop vs pure forEach

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var values = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}]

Tests:

lodash.forEach
var count = 0; _.forEach(values, function(v,i) { if (v.a != null) { count++; } })
native for
var count = 0; for (var i = 0; i < values.length; i++) { if (values[i].a != null) { count++; } }
native forEach
var count = 0; values.forEach(function(v,i) { if (v.a != null) { count++; } })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.forEach
native for
native forEach

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 llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the provided JSON and benchmark preparation code.

**What is being tested?**

The test case is comparing three different approaches to iterate over an array of objects and count the number of objects with a non-null value in the "a" property:

1. **Lodash `forEach`**: Using the `_forEach` function from the Lodash library to iterate over the array.
2. **Native `for` loop**: Iterating over the array using a traditional `for` loop.
3. **Native `forEach` method**: Using the built-in `forEach` method of the Array prototype to iterate over the array.

**What options are being compared?**

The three test cases compare the performance of:

1. **Lodash's `forEach` function**, which is a utility function provided by Lodash for iterating over arrays.
2. **A native `for` loop**, which is a traditional way of iterating over an array in JavaScript using a `for` statement.
3. **The native `forEach` method**, which is a built-in method of the Array prototype that allows iterating over an array.

**Pros and Cons:**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Lodash `forEach` function**: Pros - concise code, easy to use; Cons - introduces an additional dependency on Lodash.
2. **Native `for` loop**: Pros - no dependencies required, can be more efficient for large arrays; Cons - requires manual indexing and may lead to off-by-one errors if not careful.
3. **Native `forEach` method**: Pros - concise code, built-in to JavaScript; Cons - may have performance issues for very large arrays or complex iteration logic.

**Other considerations:**

When choosing an approach, consider the following factors:

* Performance: For large datasets, native loops (either traditional `for` loop or `forEach` method) might be more efficient than Lodash's `forEach`.
* Code conciseness and readability: If you prioritize code simplicity, using Lodash's `forEach` or the native `forEach` method can make your code more readable.
* Dependency management: If you're working in an environment where dependencies are tightly managed (e.g., using a package manager like npm), introducing a dependency on Lodash might not be a concern.

**Library and feature explanation:**

The test case uses **Lodash**, a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like array manipulation, string formatting, and more. In this test case, the `_forEach` function is used to iterate over an array.

No special JS features or syntax are used in this test case beyond basic JavaScript operations (arrays, loops, conditionals).

**Other alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to iterating over arrays, consider using:

1. **Array.prototype.map()**: A built-in method that can be used to iterate over an array and perform some operation on each element.
2. **Array.prototype.every()**: Another built-in method that can be used to check if all elements in the array satisfy a certain condition.
3. **Third-party libraries**: Other utility libraries like Underscore.js, Ramda, or even custom-built functions might offer alternative iteration mechanisms.

That's a wrap!

Related benchmarks:

lodash forEach vs pure for i loop vs pure forEach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.forEach vs native for vs native forEach

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.forEach

native for

native forEach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.1:latest, generated one year ago):