Benchmark: Underscore Each vs Lodash Each vs Native forEach

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.8.3/underscore-min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = Array(10000).fill();

Tests:

Underscore each
_.each(data, ele => { console.log(ele) })
Lodash each
_.each(data, ele => { console.log(ele) })
Native forEach
data.forEach(ele => { console.log(ele) })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Underscore each
Lodash each
Native forEach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/123.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 123 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Native forEach

26/s

Underscore each

23/s

Lodash each

23/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Native forEach	26 Ops/sec
Underscore each	23 Ops/sec
Lodash each	23 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, compared, and analyzed.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of three different approaches to iterate over an array:

1. **Underscore each**: Uses the underscore library's `each` function to iterate over the array.
2. **Lodash each**: Uses the lodash library's `each` function to iterate over the array.
3. **Native forEach**: Uses the native JavaScript `forEach` method to iterate over the array.

**Comparison of Approaches**

Here's a brief overview of each approach and their pros and cons:

* **Underscore each**: This approach uses the underscore library, which provides a more functional programming style of iteration. The `each` function takes two arguments: the array and a callback function that will be executed for each element. This approach is more concise but may incur overhead due to the additional library.
	+ Pros: concise, easy to read
	+ Cons: adds dependency on underscore library, potential performance overhead
* **Lodash each**: Similar to underscore each, this approach uses the lodash library's `each` function. Lodash provides a more extensive set of utility functions for functional programming, which can be beneficial in certain scenarios.
	+ Pros: provides additional utility functions, concise
	+ Cons: adds dependency on lodash library, potential performance overhead
* **Native forEach**: This approach uses the native JavaScript `forEach` method, which is the most lightweight and efficient way to iterate over an array. However, it may not be as concise or readable as the other two approaches.
	+ Pros: lightweight, efficient
	+ Cons: less concise, potentially harder to read

**Library Considerations**

In both "Underscore each" and "Lodash each" test cases, we're using external libraries to provide a functional programming style of iteration. These libraries add dependencies and potential overhead, but also offer additional utility functions that can simplify code.

**Native JavaScript Syntax**

The `forEach` method in the native JavaScript implementation is not explicitly tested as part of this benchmark, but it's worth noting that `forEach` is a built-in method that's designed for performance-critical code.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches to iterate over an array might include:

* Using a traditional loop with an index variable (`for (var i = 0; i < array.length; i++) { ... }`)
* Using the Array.prototype.reduce() method
* Using the Array.prototype.map() method

However, these alternatives are likely to be less efficient than using `forEach` or similar methods.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The script preparation code creates an array of 10,000 elements and assigns it to the `data` variable. The HTML preparation code includes links to the underscore and lodash libraries, which are loaded before running the benchmark.

Overall, this benchmark provides a useful comparison of different approaches to iterating over an array in JavaScript, highlighting the trade-offs between conciseness, readability, and performance.

Underscore Each vs Lodash Each vs Native forEach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `Underscore each vs Lodash each vs Native forEach`

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Underscore each

Lodash each

Native forEach

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Underscore Each vs Lodash Each vs Native forEach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Underscore each vs Lodash each vs Native forEach

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Underscore each

Lodash each

Native forEach

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: `Underscore each vs Lodash each vs Native forEach`