Benchmark: Lodash vs Native Date string comparison

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Tests:

Date Object without lodash
const articles = ["10-2-2021", "9-3-2022", "2-4-2021"]; const byYear = {}; articles.forEach(el => { const year = new Date(el).getFullYear(); const objYear = byYear[year]; byYear[year] = Array.isArray(objYear) ? [...objYear, el] : [el]; });
String Parse with lodash
const articles = ["10-2-2021", "9-3-2022", "2-4-2021"]; const articleYear = (posted_date) => posted_date.split("-").pop(); const articlesByYear = _.groupBy(articles, articleYear);

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 runs

String Parse with lodash

3.0M/s

Date Object without lodash

1.0M/s

Fastest: String Parse with lodash (2.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ String Parse with lodash: 2,950,585 ops/sec
• Date Object without lodash: 1,019,324 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
Date Object without lodash
String Parse with lodash

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

String Parse with lodash

2.9M/s

Date Object without lodash

760K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ String Parse with lodash	2,906,476 Ops/sec
Date Object without lodash	759,932 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 components.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches to parse dates from strings:

1. **Native JavaScript**: This approach uses the built-in `Date` object to extract the year from the date string.
2. **Lodash**: This approach uses the popular JavaScript utility library Lodash, specifically the `groupBy` function, to group the articles by their parsed year.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing two options:

* **Native Date Object**: Using the built-in `Date` object to extract the year from the date string.
* **Lodash with String Parse**: Using Lodash's `groupBy` function to group the articles by their parsed year.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Native Date Object**

Pros:

* Fast and efficient, as it uses built-in functionality.
* No dependencies or overhead from external libraries.

Cons:

* May not be accurate if the input strings are malformed or in a non-standard format.
* May require additional processing to handle edge cases (e.g., handling timezones).

**Lodash with String Parse**

Pros:

* More flexible and robust, as it can handle various date formats and edge cases.
* Reduces the need for manual date parsing logic.

Cons:

* Adds external library dependencies, which may introduce overhead or security risks.
* May be slower than the native approach due to the overhead of loading Lodash.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as string manipulation, array operations, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash's `groupBy` function is used to group the articles by their parsed year. The `articleYear` function uses Lodash's `split` function to extract the year from each date string.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being used in these benchmarks. The code is standard JavaScript, and the focus is on comparing different approaches to achieve a specific goal.

**Other Alternatives**

If you wanted to implement this benchmark using alternative approaches, some options could be:

* Using a date parsing library like moment.js
* Implementing custom date parsing logic using regular expressions or other techniques
* Using a different JavaScript library or framework that provides similar functionality (e.g., React's `Date` utility)

However, these alternatives would likely introduce significant changes to the benchmark code and may not provide a direct comparison to the native and Lodash approaches.

Lodash vs Native Date string comparison (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `Date Object without lodash vs String Parse with lodash`

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Date Object without lodash

String Parse with lodash

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 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 vs Native Date string comparison (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: Date Object without lodash vs String Parse with lodash

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Date Object without lodash

String Parse with lodash

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 5 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 5 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: `Date Object without lodash vs String Parse with lodash`