Benchmark: multiple optional chaining & nullish coalescing vs _.get

Script Preparation code:

var a = {
    _TEST: {
        some: {
            very_long_key_variant: 1
        }
    }
}

Tests:

Optional chaining + nullish coalescing
const variant = a?._TEST?.some?.very_long_key_variant ?? 0; const variantB = a?._TEST?.some?.very_long_nonexistent_key_variant ?? 0;
_.get
const variant = _.get(a._TEST, 'some.very_long_key_variant', 0); const variantB = _.get(a._TEST, 'some.very_long_nonexistent_key_variant', 0);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Optional chaining + nullish coalescing
_.get

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 break down the provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches to accessing nested properties in an object:

1. **Optional Chaining & Nullish Coalescing**: This approach uses the optional chaining operator (`?.`) and nullish coalescing operator (`??`) to safely access nested properties.
2. **_.get (Lodash utility function)**: This approach uses a custom Lodash function, `_get`, designed specifically for accessing nested properties in objects.

**Options being compared**

The two options are being compared in terms of their performance and efficiency.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Optional Chaining & Nullish Coalescing**
	* Pros:
		+ Native support in modern JavaScript engines, eliminating the need for a custom library.
		+ More concise and expressive syntax.
		+ Better maintainability, as it's part of the language.
	* Cons:
		+ May have performance overhead due to additional checks.
2. **_.get (Lodash utility function)**
	* Pros:
		+ Designed specifically for accessing nested properties, making it more efficient.
		+ Can handle complex paths with ease.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires a separate library installation.
		+ Less concise and expressive syntax compared to optional chaining.

**Library: _.get (Lodash utility function)**

The `_get` function is part of the Lodash utility library, which provides a set of common functional programming utilities. In this context, it's used to access nested properties in an object. The `_.get` function takes three arguments:

* The object to search (`a._TEST`)
* The path to follow (`'some.very_long_key_variant'`)
* A default value to return if the property is not found (`0`)

**Other considerations**

When deciding between these two approaches, consider the following factors:

* **Performance**: If you need optimal performance and don't mind a slightly more verbose syntax, optional chaining with nullish coalescing might be a better choice. However, if you prioritize conciseness and are willing to accept potential performance overhead, the `_get` function might be a better fit.
* **Readability and maintainability**: If code readability is crucial for your project, optional chaining with nullish coalescing might be a better choice due to its more expressive syntax.

**Other alternatives**

While not directly compared in this benchmark, other alternatives include:

* **Brackets (`[]`) notation**: This approach uses brackets instead of dot notation for accessing nested properties. For example: `a[_TEST][some][very_long_key_variant]`.
* **String manipulation**: In some cases, you might use string manipulation to construct the property path. However, this approach can be error-prone and less efficient.

In summary, the benchmark is comparing two approaches to accessing nested properties in an object: optional chaining with nullish coalescing and a custom Lodash utility function, `_get`. When deciding between these options, consider performance, readability, maintainability, and the specific requirements of your project.

Related benchmarks:

multiple optional chaining & nullish coalescing vs _.get (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Optional chaining + nullish coalescing vs _.get

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Optional chaining + nullish coalescing

_.get

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):