Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Array.isArray vs _.isArray
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
_.isArray vs Array.isArray
Created:
4 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js'></script>
Tests:
_.isArray
const testArray = [1, 2, 3] _.isArray(testArray)
Array.isArray
const testArray = [1, 2, 3] Array.isArray(testArray)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
_.isArray
Array.isArray
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to understand what is being tested. **Benchmark Definition:** The benchmark measures the performance difference between two JavaScript functions: `Array.isArray()` and `_isArray()`. The latter is a part of the Lodash library, which provides a utility function for checking if an object is an array. **Script Preparation Code:** The script preparation code includes a reference to the Lodash library version 4.17.10, which makes its functions available in the benchmark environment. **Individual Test Cases:** There are two test cases: 1. `_.isArray()`: This test case creates an array `[1, 2, 3]` and passes it to the `_isArray()` function from Lodash. 2. `Array.isArray()`: This test case is identical to the first one but uses the built-in `Array.isArray()` function instead of `_isArray()`. **Pros and Cons of Different Approaches:** * **Built-in `Array.isArray()`**: The pros include: + Native performance, as it's a built-in function. + Typically faster than external libraries due to less overhead. + Easy to use and understand. * **_isArray() from Lodash**: The pros include: + Consistency with the rest of the Lodash library, making it easier for developers familiar with Lodash to use this specific function. + May provide a more robust implementation, as it's part of a larger collection of utility functions. * **External Library Overhead**: Using an external library like Lodash can introduce overhead due to: + Download and parsing the library code + Potential caching or other optimizations that might not be beneficial for this specific test case **Other Considerations:** * The use of Lodash here is likely a deliberate choice, as it provides a consistent API and implementation across the library. However, for small scripts or projects where performance matters, using built-in functions like `Array.isArray()` might be preferred. * It's worth noting that, in modern JavaScript environments, the performance difference between these two approaches is unlikely to have a significant impact on overall application performance. **Alternatives:** If you were to create a similar benchmark for other array-related methods or functions, some alternatives could include: * Checking if an object is an instance of `Array` using `instanceof`: `new Array(10).instanceof Array` * Using `typeof` with the string `'array'`: `typeof (1 + 2) === 'number && typeof [10] === 'object' && Array.isArray([10])` Keep in mind that these alternatives might not provide the same level of performance or consistency as the built-in `Array.isArray()` function.
Related benchmarks:
Lodash.js vs Native isArray
Lodash isEmpty vs native .isArray + length
Lodash.js vs instanceof Array
Lodash.js vs Native isArray1212
Lodash.js vs Native isArray (2023)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?