Benchmark: lodash join vs join native

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

max = 10000;

arr1 = [];
for (let i = 0; i < max; i++) {
	arr1.push('a')
}

Tests:

Native
arr1.join(' ')
lodash
_.join(arr1, ' ')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native
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

Test name	Executions per second
Native	3332.7 Ops/sec
lodash	3340.4 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 is being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches: using native JavaScript (`join`) versus using a library function from Lodash (`_.join`).

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Native JavaScript**: The `join()` method is used with the `String.prototype.join()` method, which concatenates an array of strings into a single string.
2. **Lodash (`_join`)**: A custom implementation using the Lodash library's `_join()` function, which performs a similar operation as the native `join()` method.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Native JavaScript**:
	+ Pros: Built-in functionality, no external dependencies required.
	+ Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of string concatenation in a loop.
* **Lodash (`_join`)**:
	+ Pros: Optimized for performance, likely implemented using specialized algorithms.
	+ Cons: Requires an additional dependency (the Lodash library), which might introduce some overhead.

**Library and Purpose**

In this case, the Lodash library provides a convenient and optimized implementation of the `_.join()` function. The `_join()` function is designed to work with arrays of values and a separator string, performing concatenation efficiently.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these benchmark tests. However, it's worth noting that the `RawUAString` field contains information about the browser's User Agent string, which can provide insights into the browser's configuration and version.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to compare performance with other join methods, here are a few alternatives:

* Using an array comprehension or a `map()`-based approach
* Utilizing a library like Underscore.js (another popular utility library) for the `join()` function
* Implementing your own custom join algorithm using a different data structure (e.g., using an interval-based approach)

Keep in mind that each of these alternatives may have pros and cons, depending on the specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

lodash join vs join native (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native vs lodash

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Native

lodash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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