Benchmark: lodash.get vs optional chaining(babel) vs optional chaining(es2020) vs Without Optional chaining

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var state = {
  wrapped1: {
    wrapped2: {
      location: {
    	search: '',
    	id: 12
      }
    }
  },
  data: {}
};

Tests:

lodash.get
var l = _.get(state, ['wrapped1','wrapped2','location','search']);
Optional chaining (babel es2015)
var _state$wrapped, _state$wrapped$wrappe, _state$wrapped$wrappe2; var s = state === null || state === void 0 ? void 0 : (_state$wrapped = state.wrapped1) === null || _state$wrapped === void 0 ? void 0 : (_state$wrapped$wrappe = _state$wrapped.wrapped2) === null || _state$wrapped$wrappe === void 0 ? void 0 : (_state$wrapped$wrappe2 = _state$wrapped$wrappe.location) === null || _state$wrapped$wrappe2 === void 0 ? void 0 : _state$wrapped$wrappe2.search;
Optional chaining (es2020)
var c = state?.wrapped1?.wrapped2?.location?.search
Without Optional chaining
var d = state || state.wrapped1 || state.wrapped1.wrapped2 || state.wrapped1.wrapped2.localtion || state.wrapped1.wrapped2.localtion.search

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.get
Optional chaining (babel es2015)
Optional chaining (es2020)
Without Optional chaining

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/150.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 150 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Without Optional chaining

1081.4M/s

Optional chaining (babel es2015)

1081.3M/s

Optional chaining (es2020)

1080.1M/s

lodash.get

31.6M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Without Optional chaining	1,081,445,248 Ops/sec
Optional chaining (babel es2015)	1,081,310,464 Ops/sec
Optional chaining (es2020)	1,080,146,560 Ops/sec
lodash.get	31,566,752 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 benchmark and its test cases.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three approaches to access nested object properties in JavaScript:

1. `lodash.get`
2. Optional chaining with Babel (ES2015) syntax
3. Optional chaining with ES2020 syntax
4. Without optional chaining

**Options Compared**

Here's a brief description of each approach:

* **`lodash.get`**: A utility function from the Lodash library that allows you to safely navigate nested objects.
* **Optional chaining with Babel (ES2015) syntax**: This uses the `?.` operator, which was introduced in ES2015. The `?` symbol is used to indicate a potential null or undefined value, and the expression only evaluates if it's truthy.
* **Optional chaining with ES2020 syntax**: Similar to the previous approach, but uses the new `?.` operator introduced in ES2020.
* **Without optional chaining**: This approach uses traditional dot notation (e.g., `state.wrapped1.wrapped2.location.search`) and doesn't take into account potential null or undefined values.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of each approach:

* **`lodash.get`**:
	+ Pros: Easy to use, provides a clear and safe way to navigate nested objects.
	+ Cons: Adds an external dependency (Lodash), which may not be desirable for all projects.
* **Optional chaining with Babel (ES2015) syntax**:
	+ Pros: Allows for more concise code, uses a familiar syntax pattern (`?.`).
	+ Cons: Only supports ES2015, which might limit its use in newer projects that target later versions of JavaScript.
* **Optional chaining with ES2020 syntax**:
	+ Pros: Upgrades the `?` operator to the new ES2020 version, providing improved performance and readability.
	+ Cons: Requires a newer JavaScript engine or transpiler to work (e.g., Babel 7.4.3+).
* **Without optional chaining**:
	+ Pros: Works with all modern JavaScript engines, doesn't add any external dependencies.
	+ Cons: Can lead to null pointer exceptions if the nested object properties don't exist.

**Library and Syntax**

The `lodash.get` function is part of the Lodash library, which provides a wide range of utility functions for working with JavaScript data structures. The optional chaining syntax (`?.`) was introduced in ES2015 (Babel 6.3.2+) and later improved upon in ES2020.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

The test cases use the new `?.` operator, which is a feature of modern JavaScript syntax. This operator allows you to safely access nested object properties without throwing errors when they don't exist.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to Lodash's `get` function or optional chaining, consider:

* Using the `in` operator (`state.wrapped1 && state.wrapped1.wrapped2 && state.wrapped1.wrapped2.location.search`)
* Utilizing a library like `get-object-value` (a tiny, lightweight alternative to Lodash's `get` function)
* Implementing your own custom function for navigating nested objects

Keep in mind that the choice of approach ultimately depends on your project's specific requirements and constraints.

lodash.get vs optional chaining(babel) vs optional chaining(es2020) vs Without Optional chaining (version: 2)

Compare lodash.get to babel transpiled ?. (optional chaining) operator

Comparing performance of: `lodash.get vs Optional chaining (babel es2015) vs Optional chaining (es2020) vs Without Optional chaining`

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

lodash.get

Optional chaining (babel es2015)

Optional chaining (es2020)

Without Optional chaining

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

lodash.get vs optional chaining(babel) vs optional chaining(es2020) vs Without Optional chaining (version: 2)

Compare lodash.get to babel transpiled ?. (optional chaining) operator

Comparing performance of: lodash.get vs Optional chaining (babel es2015) vs Optional chaining (es2020) vs Without Optional chaining

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

lodash.get

Optional chaining (babel es2015)

Optional chaining (es2020)

Without Optional chaining

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: `lodash.get vs Optional chaining (babel es2015) vs Optional chaining (es2020) vs Without Optional chaining`