Benchmark: Lodash vs Vanilla JS Test

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Tests:

Lodash
const status = "ACCEPTED_ON_AUDIT"; for ( let i = 0; i < 100000; i++) { _.capitalize(status.split("_")) }
Vanilla Js
const status = "ACCEPTED_ON_AUDIT"; for ( let i = 0; i < 100000; i++) { status[0].toUpperCase() + status.slice(1).toLowerCase().split("_").join(" "); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Vanilla Js

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	57.8 Ops/sec
Vanilla Js	65.4 Ops/sec

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 JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between using Lodash, a popular JavaScript utility library, and writing custom code without any libraries (also known as "vanilla" JavaScript). The test case compares the execution time of two identical operations: splitting a string, converting its first character to uppercase, and then joining the remaining characters with spaces.

**Options being compared**

There are two approaches being tested:

1. **Lodash**: Using Lodash's `capitalize` function, which takes a string as input and returns a new string with the first character capitalized and the rest in lowercase.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript**: Writing custom code to achieve the same result using string manipulation techniques. The test case uses two separate steps: splitting the string into an array of words, converting the first word to uppercase, and then joining the remaining words with spaces.

**Pros and cons of each approach**

**Lodash:**

Pros:

* Convenience: Lodash provides a pre-built function that makes the code more readable and easier to maintain.
* Performance: Lodash's implementation is often optimized for performance, especially when compared to custom-written code.

Cons:

* Overhead: Including an external library adds overhead due to the need to load and initialize the library.
* Dependence on library: The test case relies on Lodash being available in the browser or environment, which may not always be the case.

**Vanilla JavaScript:**

Pros:

* No dependencies: This approach doesn't require any additional libraries, making it more portable and self-contained.
* Control: By writing custom code, developers have full control over the implementation details.

Cons:

* Complexity: The custom code can become complex and harder to read, especially for users unfamiliar with string manipulation techniques.
* Performance: Without optimization, custom-written code might not perform as well as Lodash's optimized implementation.

**Library (Lodash)**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for various tasks, such as array manipulation, string processing, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash's `capitalize` function is used to split the input string into words and capitalize the first word.

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

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being used in this benchmark that require explanation.

**Other alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to writing custom code without Lodash, some options include:

* Using `String.prototype.split()` and `String.prototype.toUpperCase()`, as shown in the Vanilla JavaScript test case.
* Implementing a custom string processing function using loops and conditional statements.
* Utilizing other utility libraries or frameworks that provide similar functionality to Lodash.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might offer trade-offs in terms of performance, readability, or portability, depending on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash vs Vanilla JS Test (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Vanilla Js

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Vanilla Js

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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