Benchmark: Lodash Filter vs Native Filter with Empty Check in Lodash context with other operations

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

window.items = [
  { id: 'a5', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'a3', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'a8', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'b1', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'ac0', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'a7', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'a0', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'a6', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'a5', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'a4', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'a3', a: 1, b: 2 },
  { id: 'a2', a: 1, b: 2 }
];

window.products = {
  a0: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a0' },
  a1: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a1' },
  a2: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a2' },
  a3: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a3' },
  a5: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a5' },
  a7: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a7' },
  a8: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a8' },
  a9: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a9' },
  a10: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a10' },
  a11: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a11' },
  a12: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a12' },
  a13: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a13' },
  a14: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a14' },
  a15: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a15' },
  a16: { x: 1, y: 1, z: 1, id: 'a16' }
};

Tests:

Lodash Filter
window.result = _(items) .map(item => item.id) .uniq() .map(id => products[id] || {}) .filter(el => !_.isEmpty(el)) .value(); //console.log('result lodash:', result);
Native Filter
window.result = _(items) .map(item => item.id) .uniq() .map(id => products[id] || {}) .value() .filter(el => !!Object.keys(el).length); //console.log('result native:', result);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash Filter
Native Filter

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.

I'd be happy to help you understand what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: using Lodash (a popular JavaScript utility library) for filtering and transforming an array, versus implementing the same logic natively without any external libraries.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Lodash Filter**: This test case uses Lodash to filter the `items` array, which contains objects with multiple properties. The code uses `_` (the Lodash alias) to perform the following operations:
	* Map each item's ID to a unique value.
	* Get the corresponding object from the `products` object using the filtered IDs.
	* Filter out any empty objects from the resulting array.
2. **Native Filter**: This test case implements the same logic without using Lodash. It performs the following operations:
	* Map each item's ID to a unique value.
	* Get the corresponding object from the `products` object using the filtered IDs.
	* Filter out any empty objects from the resulting array (using `!!Object.keys(el).length`).

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a set of functions for common tasks, such as:

* Array manipulation (`map`, `filter`, `uniq`)
* Object manipulation (`get`, `assign`, etc.)
* String manipulation (`trim`, `split`, etc.)

In this benchmark, Lodash is used to perform the filtering and transformation operations on the `items` array.

**Native vs. Library-based Approach**

There are pros and cons to each approach:

* **Native Approach**: Advantages:
	+ Potential performance benefits due to fewer overheads.
	+ Can be optimized for specific use cases.
	Disadvantages:
	+ Requires more code and maintenance effort.
	+ May not be as readable or maintainable, especially for complex logic.
* **Library-based Approach (Lodash)**: Advantages:
	+ Provides a set of pre-written functions that can be reused across projects.
	+ Often faster and more efficient than implementing similar logic from scratch.
	Disadvantages:
	+ Requires including an external library, which may increase latency or bundle size.
	+ May not provide the same level of optimization as native code.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, consider:

* Using other libraries like Underscore.js or Ramda for similar functionality to Lodash.
* Implementing custom functions for filtering and transformation operations.
* Using a different programming paradigm, such as functional programming with `Array.prototype.filter` and `Object.keys()`.

Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preferences.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash Filter vs Native Filter with Empty Check in Lodash context with other operations (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash Filter vs Native Filter

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash Filter

Native Filter

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):