Benchmark: Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing vs lodash get

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {a: {b: {c: {d: 1}}}}
var badObj = {}

Tests:

Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing
var c = obj.a?.b?.c?.d ?? 2 var d = badObj.a?.b?.c?.d ?? 2
Lodash
_.get(obj, "a.b.c.d", 2) _.get(badObj, "a.b.c.d", 2)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing
Lodash

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing	5144797.0 Ops/sec
Lodash	776188.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches: Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing, and Lodash's `get` function.

* **Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing**: This is a JavaScript feature introduced in ECMAScript 2020 (ES12). It allows you to navigate objects using optional chaining (`?.`) and nullish coalescing (`??`). The syntax `a?.b?.c?.d ?? 2` returns the value of `d` if it exists, or falls back to `2`.
* **Lodash's `get` function**: This is a utility function from the Lodash library that allows you to safely navigate objects and provide default values.

**Comparison**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:

1. Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing: Using this syntax, the code `var c = obj.a?.b?.c?.d ?? 2` will execute more quickly if the object is well-structured.
2. Lodash's `get` function: This approach requires creating a separate function call to perform the navigation, which may incur additional overhead.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing**:
	+ Pros: More concise syntax, can be faster if objects are well-structured.
	+ Cons: May not work as expected with very deep or complex object structures.
* **Lodash's `get` function**:
	+ Pros: Provides more control over the navigation process, works with any JavaScript object.
	+ Cons: Requires an additional function call, may be slower than Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, Lodash is used. Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like string manipulation, array operations, and object navigation.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing are the special features being tested in this benchmark. If you're not familiar with them:

* Optional Chaining (`?.`) allows you to navigate objects without throwing errors if a property is missing.
* Nullish Coalescing (`??`) returns the first operand if it's truthy, or the second operand if it's falsy.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need more control over object navigation, you could use:

* Bracket notation (`obj["a"].b.c.d`)
* `in` operator to check if a property exists before navigating (`if ("a" in obj && "b" in obj.a && "c" in obj.a.b))`
* A custom function that checks for existence and returns the value or a default.

However, these approaches may be less concise and more error-prone than Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing.

Related benchmarks:

Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing vs lodash get (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing vs Lodash

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Optional Chaining and Nullish Coalescing

Lodash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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