Benchmark: Lodash.js vs Native 10000000

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = new Array(10000000).fill({'firstName':'First', 'lastName': 'Last'});


var printFullName = (firstName, lastName) => console.log(firstName+' '+lastName);

Tests:

Native
data.map(item => printFullName(item.firstName, item.lastName));
Lodash
_.map(data, item => printFullName(item.firstName, item.lastName))

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:

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 benchmark and its options.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches: using native JavaScript functions to map over an array, and using the Lodash library's `map` function.

**Native Approach**

The native approach uses two built-in JavaScript functions: `Array.prototype.map()` and a custom `printFullName` function. The `map()` function applies the provided callback function to each element of the array, returning a new array with the results. The `printFullName` function takes two string arguments, concatenates them, and logs the result to the console.

**Lodash Approach**

The Lodash approach uses the `lodash.map` function from the library. This function is similar to the native `map()` function but provides additional options and a more functional programming style.

**Comparison of Approaches**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

* **Native Approach:**
	+ Pros:
		- No external dependencies (no Lodash library).
		- Can be optimized for specific use cases or environments.
	+ Cons:
		- More complex code, potentially harder to read and maintain.
		- May require additional setup or configuration (e.g., console logging).
* **Lodash Approach:**
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and readable code.
		- Provides additional options and features, such as handling null values or transforming elements.
	+ Cons:
		- External dependency on the Lodash library.
		- May have performance overhead due to the additional library.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like array manipulation, object transformation, and functional programming. The `map` function in Lodash applies a callback function to each element of an array, returning a new array with the results. This allows developers to write more concise and expressive code while still leveraging the power of JavaScript.

**Special JS Feature: Async/Await**

Neither benchmark explicitly uses async/await syntax. However, the `console.log` statement in the `printFullName` function is not asynchronous, implying that the code is running synchronously. If you were to modify the benchmark to use async/await, it would likely require significant changes to the script preparation code.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches or libraries, here are a few options:

* **Underscore.js**: Another popular JavaScript utility library that provides similar functions to Lodash.
* **ES6 `map` function with arrow functions**: This approach uses the ES6 `map` function with arrow functions (e.g., `(item) => printFullName(item.firstName, item.lastName)`).
* **Custom implementation using a loop**: You could implement the mapping logic manually using a loop instead of relying on the `map()` or `lodash.map` functions.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics, readability, and maintainability compared to the native approach and Lodash approach.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.js vs Native 10000000 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native vs Lodash

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native

Lodash

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):