Benchmark: lodash test3 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var max1 = 100000; // 100,000 (100 Thousand)
var max2 = 10000000; // 10,000,000 (10 Million)
var max3 = 100000000; // 100,000,000 (100 Million)

var arr1 = [];
//for (var i = 0; i <= max1; i++) { arr1.push(i); }

var arr2 = [];
for (var i = 0; i <= max2; i++) { arr2.push(i); }

var arr3 = [];
//for (var i = 0; i <= max3; i++) { arr3.push(i); }

Tests:

native
arr2.forEach(function (element, index) { element = element*2; });
Lodash
_.forEach(arr2, function (element, index) { element = element*2; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
native
Lodash

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.

Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's tested in this benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two test cases: one for the native JavaScript `forEach` loop, and another for the Lodash library's `forEach` function. The test measures the performance difference between these two approaches when iterating over a large array (up to 10 million elements) and performing a simple operation on each element (doubling its value).

**Options compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Native JavaScript `forEach` loop**: This is the built-in, browser-implemented function that executes a callback function for each element in an array.
2. **Lodash library's `forEach` function**: Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides various functional programming helpers. In this case, the `forEach` function is used to iterate over the array and perform the same operation as the native loop.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

1. **Native JavaScript `forEach` loop**:
	* Pros:
		+ Built-in, optimized for performance
		+ No external dependency (e.g., Lodash)
		+ Simple to implement
	* Cons:
		+ May not be as flexible or expressive as other libraries
		+ Some implementations might have minor performance variations
2. **Lodash library's `forEach` function**:
	* Pros:
		+ Provides a simple, consistent API for iteration and operations
		+ Can be more flexible and expressive than native loops
		+ Often has better code completion support in IDEs
	* Cons:
		+ External dependency (may introduce additional overhead)
		+ May not be as optimized for performance as native implementations

**Library usage**

In this benchmark, the Lodash library is used to provide a standardized, consistent API for iteration and operations. The `_.forEach` function simplifies the code and allows users to focus on the test's logic without worrying about implementing the iteration mechanism.

**Special JS feature or syntax (none mentioned)**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to implement a custom, non-library-based `forEach` loop for this test case, you would need to consider using a different approach, such as:

1. Using `Array.prototype.forEach.call()` with an array and a callback function.
2. Implementing a custom iterator or generator function.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not be optimized for performance like the native `forEach` loop, but they can provide a more educational experience when exploring the inner workings of JavaScript iteration mechanisms.

In conclusion, this benchmark provides a simple, illustrative example of how to compare performance between two iteration approaches: the native JavaScript `forEach` loop and Lodash's `forEach` function. By testing these options, users can gain insight into the trade-offs between built-in implementations and third-party libraries in their own projects.

Related benchmarks:

lodash test3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: native vs Lodash

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

native

Lodash

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):