Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
times or array spread
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Native vs Lodash.js filter
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>
Script Preparation code:
const NUMBER_OF_SKELETONS = 4;
Tests:
Native
const SKELETONS = [...Array(4).keys()]; SKELETONS.map((val) => ({ stuff: val, }))
Lodash.js filter
const NUMBER_OF_SKELETONS = 4; _.times(NUMBER_OF_SKELETONS, (i) => ({ stuff: i, }))
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Native
Lodash.js filter
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):
I'll break down the benchmark and its test cases for you. **Benchmark Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided JSON data represents two benchmark test cases: "times or array spread" and its variations using Lodash.js library. **Test Cases** There are two main test cases: 1. **Native**: This test case uses the native JavaScript `Array` and Array methods to generate an array of 4 elements, each with a value representing the index in the array. The generated array is then mapped to create a new object with a single property "stuff" containing the index. 2. **Lodash.js filter**: This test case uses Lodash.js library (version 4.17.4) to generate an array of 4 elements, each with a value representing the index in the array. The `_.times` function is used to create the array, and then `_`.filter` is used to map the array. **Options Compared** The two test cases compare the performance of native JavaScript methods versus Lodash.js library functions: * **Native**: Uses native JavaScript Array and Array methods. * **Lodash.js filter**: Uses Lodash.js library's `_.times` and `_`.filter` functions. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons for each approach: **Native** Pros: * No additional library dependencies required * Can be more efficient since it doesn't introduce extra overhead Cons: * May require more JavaScript expertise to implement correctly * Performance can vary depending on the specific use case and browser **Lodash.js filter** Pros: * Simplifies code by providing a standardized way of working with arrays * Often optimized for performance in Lodash.js library Cons: * Introduces additional library dependencies, which may impact performance * May not be as efficient as native JavaScript methods in some cases **Library: Lodash.js** Lodash.js is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for working with arrays, objects, and more. In this benchmark, it's used to provide a standardized way of generating an array and mapping its elements. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There isn't any specific special JS feature or syntax mentioned in the provided code. However, Lodash.js uses some ES6+ features like template literals (`_`) for its functions. **Other Alternatives** If you need to generate arrays or perform similar operations, other alternatives include: * Using `Array.from()` and Array methods * Utilizing libraries like Ramda.js or Immer.js * Creating custom utility functions Keep in mind that the choice of approach depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.
Related benchmarks:
lodash slice
tesst1
ES6 vs Lodash range
Comparing lodash's times with Array.from
Spread Operator vs Lodash [2]
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?