Benchmark: Test sorting - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
    return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max)).toString();
}

var arr = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 100000; i++) {
    arr.push({
        value: getRandomInt(100)
    });
}

Tests:

Lodash
_.sortBy(arr,"value");
JS sort
arr.sort((a, b) => a.value.localeCompare(b.value))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
JS sort

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 JavaScript microbenchmarks!

**Benchmark Purpose**

The provided JSON represents two benchmark test cases: "JS sort" and "Lodash sort". The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches for sorting an array of objects.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Native JavaScript Sort**: This method uses the built-in `sort()` function, which sorts the elements of an array in place and returns the array.
2. **Lodash Sort**: This method uses the `sortBy()` function from the Lodash library, which sorts an array based on a specified criteria.

**Pros and Cons**

### Native JavaScript Sort

Pros:

* Lightweight: It doesn't require any additional libraries or dependencies.
* Built-in functionality: It's part of the standard JavaScript language.

Cons:

* Slower: The native sort implementation can be slower than optimized external libraries like Lodash.

### Lodash Sort

Pros:

* Optimized: The `sortBy()` function is highly optimized for performance, making it faster than the native sort implementation.
* Extensive feature set: Lodash provides a wide range of sorting algorithms and options.

Cons:

* Additional dependency: It requires the Lodash library to be included in the project, which can add complexity and overhead.
* Size overhead: The Lodash library itself is relatively large, which can impact performance for small datasets.

**Library - Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, string trimming, and sorting. In this benchmark, the `sortBy()` function is used to sort an array based on a specified criteria.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being used in this benchmark. The focus is solely on comparing the performance of two different sorting approaches.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative libraries or implementations for sorting arrays, here are some options:

* **Array.prototype.sort() with a compare function**: This method allows you to provide a custom comparison function that can be used to sort the array based on specific criteria.
* **D3.js Sort**: D3.js is a popular data visualization library that provides optimized sorting algorithms and implementation.
* **Ramda Sort**: Ramda is another utility library that provides a range of functional programming functions, including sorting algorithms.

Keep in mind that each alternative has its own trade-offs and performance characteristics, so it's essential to evaluate them based on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

Test sorting (version: 0)

JS sort vs lodash sort

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs JS sort

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

JS sort

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):