Benchmark: Lodash.js(last) vs Native(at)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/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.at(-1)
Lodash.js filter
_.last(arr2)

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

Native

17.6M/s

Lodash.js filter

8.1M/s

Fastest: Native (2.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Native: 17,612,636 ops/sec
• Lodash.js filter: 8,058,964 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native
Lodash.js filter

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/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Lodash.js filter

189.3M/s

Native

185.4M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Lodash.js filter	189,319,376 Ops/sec
Native	185,430,672 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 provided JSON represents a benchmark comparison between two approaches: native JavaScript and Lodash.js (a popular utility library for JavaScript). The benchmark is designed to test the performance of accessing the last element in an array using two different methods:

1. Native JavaScript approach (`arr2.at(-1)`)
2. Lodash.js filter (`_.last(arr2)`)

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

* `arr2.at(-1)`: This method uses the `at()` function to access the element at the specified index (-1, which is the last index in the array). The native JavaScript implementation provides a direct and efficient way to access the last element.
* `_.last(arr2)`: This method uses the Lodash.js library's `last()` function to return the last element of the array. Lodash.js provides a higher-order function that can be used with various data structures, including arrays.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **Native JavaScript (`arr2.at(-1)`)**:
	+ Pros: Direct access, efficient, and lightweight.
	+ Cons: May not work correctly if the array is modified or has holes (e.g., `NaN` or `undefined` values).
* **Lodash.js filter (`_.last(arr2)`)**:
	+ Pros: More flexible and robust, handles edge cases like empty or modified arrays.
	+ Cons: Adds overhead due to the use of a library function.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark, Lodash.js is used for its `last()` function. Lodash.js is a popular utility library that provides various functions for tasks like array manipulation, object manipulation, and more. The `last()` function returns the last element of an array or the last element of a value (if it's not an array). In this benchmark, Lodash.js is used to provide a standardized way of accessing the last element in arrays.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark. The code uses standard JavaScript syntax and libraries like Lodash.js.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in testing alternative approaches, here are some other options:

* Use a different library for array manipulation, such as Array.prototype.at() (available in modern browsers).
* Implement your own solution using a loop or recursion to access the last element of an array.
* Test the performance of different data structures, like linked lists or trees.

Keep in mind that each approach has its trade-offs and may not be suitable for all use cases. The MeasureThat.net benchmark provides a convenient way to compare performance between different approaches and libraries.

Lodash.js(last) vs Native(at) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `Native vs Lodash.js filter`

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Native

Lodash.js filter

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Lodash.js(last) vs Native(at) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native vs Lodash.js filter

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Native

Lodash.js filter

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 7 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 7 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Native vs Lodash.js filter`