Benchmark: Rambda vs. Ramda vs. Lodash

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/ramda@0.28.0/dist/ramda.min.js"></script>
<script>
  window.Ramda = {
    ...window.R
  }
  delete window.R
</script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/rambda@7.2.1/dist/rambda.umd.js"></script>
<script>
  window.Rambda = {
    ...window.R
  }
  delete window.R
</script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = _.range(10000).map(function(i) {
  return {
    counter: i
  }
});

function isOdd(num) {
  return num % 2 === 1;
}

function square(num) {
  return num * num;
}

function lessThanThreeDigits(num) {
  return num.toString().length < 3;
}

Tests:

Lodash
var result = _.chain(data) .map('counter') .filter(isOdd) .map(square) .filter(lessThanThreeDigits) .value();
Ramda without currying
var result = Ramda.filter(lessThanThreeDigits, Ramda.map(square, Ramda.filter(isOdd, Ramda.pluck('counter', data))));
Ramda with currying
var result = Ramda.pipe( Ramda.pluck('counter'), Ramda.filter(isOdd), Ramda.map(square), Ramda.filter(lessThanThreeDigits) )(data);
Rambda without currying
var result = Rambda.filter(lessThanThreeDigits, Rambda.map(square, Rambda.filter(isOdd, Rambda.pluck('counter', data))));
Rambda with currying
var result = Rambda.pipe( Rambda.pluck('counter'), Rambda.filter(isOdd), Rambda.map(square), Rambda.filter(lessThanThreeDigits) )(data);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Ramda without currying
Ramda with currying
Rambda without currying
Rambda with currying

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 123 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	3838.2 Ops/sec
Ramda without currying	2846.8 Ops/sec
Ramda with currying	959.3 Ops/sec
Rambda without currying	3510.0 Ops/sec
Rambda with currying	3502.2 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 on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance of three functional programming libraries: Lodash, Ramda, and Rambda. The test case is designed to process an array of 10,000 objects, filtering out even numbers, squaring the remaining numbers, and then applying a length filter to keep only numbers with fewer than 3 digits.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares four versions of each library:

* Lodash: `_.chain()`, `_.filter()`, `_.map()`
* Ramda: `Ramda.filter()`, `Ramda.map()`, and two variants with currying (`Ramda.pipe()` and `Ramda.apply()`)

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Lodash**:
	* Pros: widely used, easy to learn, extensive documentation.
	* Cons: slower performance compared to Ramda and Rambda due to its more verbose API.
2. **Ramda**:
	* Pros: high-performance, concise syntax, strong focus on functional programming principles.
	* Cons: steeper learning curve, less widely adopted than Lodash.
3. **Rambda**:
	* Pros: fast performance, compact syntax inspired by LINQ, and a more modern design compared to Ramda.
	* Cons: lesser-known compared to Ramda, fewer community resources.

The use of `_.chain()` in Lodash can be seen as less efficient than using `Ramda.pipe()`, which is designed specifically for functional composition. Similarly, the use of currying in Ramda and Rambda can lead to faster performance due to reduced function overhead.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, all libraries are used extensively throughout the test case. Lodash uses `_.chain()` and multiple `_` functions to create a pipeline. Ramda uses its functional programming principles and `Ramda.pipe()` and `Ramda.apply()` methods for currying. Rambda uses its compact syntax with `Rambda.filter()`, `Rambda.map()`, and `Rambda.pipe()` for currying.

**Special JavaScript Features or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in the benchmark definition.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative functional programming libraries, some popular options include:

* **Underscore.js**: another widely used library with a similar API to Lodash.
* **Coopecy**: a more lightweight and concise alternative to Ramda and Rambda.
* **MochaScript**: a more modern JavaScript-based functional programming framework.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not offer the same level of performance or conciseness as Ramda, Rambda, or even Lodash. The choice ultimately depends on your specific needs and preferences.

Related benchmarks:

Rambda vs. Ramda vs. Lodash (version: 0)

Testing all benchmarks against each other using latest ESM.

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Ramda without currying vs Ramda with currying vs Rambda without currying vs Rambda with currying

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Ramda without currying

Ramda with currying

Rambda without currying

Rambda with currying

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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