Benchmark: Lodash vs Native maxBy

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = [{ value: 6 }, { value: 2 }, { value: 4 }]

Tests:

Lodash
var maxItem = _.maxBy(data, 'value')
Native
var maxItem = data.reduce(function(a, b) { return a.value >= b.value ? a : b }, {})

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/129.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 129 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	6017647.0 Ops/sec
Native	13415631.0 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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches to find the maximum item in an array:

1. **Lodash's `maxBy` function**: This is a utility function from the Lodash library that takes an array, a property key, and returns the item with the maximum value based on that property.
2. **Native JavaScript implementation**: The second approach uses the built-in `reduce()` method to find the maximum item in the array.

**Options compared**

The two options being compared are:

* Lodash's `maxBy` function
* A native JavaScript implementation using the `reduce()` method

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Lodash's `maxBy` function**:
	* Pros:
		+ Convenient and easy to use, as it provides a simple way to find the maximum item in an array.
		+ Less prone to errors, as Lodash handles the implementation details for you.
	* Cons:
		+ Adds overhead due to the additional library dependency.
		+ May have slower performance compared to native JavaScript implementations.
2. **Native JavaScript implementation using `reduce()`**:
	* Pros:
		+ Fast and lightweight, as it only uses built-in JavaScript methods.
		+ No additional library dependency or overhead.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires more code and manual effort to implement correctly.

**Library used:**

The Lodash library is a utility library that provides a set of functional programming helpers. In this benchmark, the `maxBy` function is used to find the maximum item in an array based on a specified property key.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There is no specific JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two different approaches to achieve the same result.

**Other alternatives:**

If you were to consider alternative approaches, some options might include:

* Using `Math.max()` with a custom compare function
* Implementing the `maxBy` function using a different library or framework (e.g., Moment.js for date-based comparisons)
* Optimizing the native JavaScript implementation using caching or memoization techniques

**Benchmark preparation code:**

The provided benchmark preparation code includes:

```javascript
var data = [{ value: 6 }, { value: 2 }, { value: 4 }];
```

This code defines an array `data` with three items, each containing a `value` property.

**Individual test cases:**

Each test case consists of two parts:

* A **Benchmark Definition**, which specifies the JavaScript code to be executed (e.g., `var maxItem = _.maxBy(data, 'value')`)
* A **Test Name**, which identifies the specific benchmark being tested (e.g., "Lodash" or "Native")

The test cases are designed to execute the specified JavaScript code multiple times and measure the execution time of each approach.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash vs Native maxBy (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Native

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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