Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
isNumber
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
native vs lodash
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
Script Preparation code:
const test = ['test', '123', 123]
Tests:
native
const test = ['test', '123', 123] for(const t of test){ const jou = !isNaN(t) }
lodash
const test = ['test', '123', 123] for(const t of test){ const jou = _.isNumber(t) }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
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):
Measuring performance of different approaches is crucial in software development, and JavaScript is a popular language for this task. The provided JSON represents two benchmark definitions: `isNumber` and its variations using the native code and the Lodash library. **Benchmark Definition** The `isNumber` function checks whether a given value is a number or not. The purpose of this benchmark is to compare the performance of different approaches in implementing this simple function. **Options Compared** Two options are compared: 1. **Native Code**: This approach uses native JavaScript syntax to implement the `isNumber` function. 2. **Lodash Library**: This approach uses the Lodash library, a popular utility library for JavaScript, to implement the `isNumber` function. **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** ### Native Code Pros: * **Native performance**: Native code executes directly on the browser's engine, providing optimal performance. * **Low overhead**: There is no additional library or dependency needed. Cons: * **Code complexity**: Implementing a robust number checking function requires careful consideration of edge cases and implementation details. * **Browser compatibility**: Different browsers may have varying degrees of support for native JavaScript features. ### Lodash Library Pros: * **Easier implementation**: Using an existing library simplifies the implementation process, reducing code duplication and potential errors. * **Robustness**: The Lodash library has been extensively tested and optimized for performance. Cons: * **Additional dependency**: Using a third-party library introduces additional overhead, such as loading time and memory usage. * **Performance impact**: While the library is optimized, it may still introduce some performance overhead compared to native code. **Lodash Library** The `_.isNumber()` function in Lodash checks whether a value is a number or not. It returns `true` if the value is an integer (`NaN` is returned for non-numeric values) and `false` otherwise. **Native JavaScript Feature/Syntax** Neither of the benchmark definitions uses any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond standard ECMAScript 2022 language features. **Other Alternatives** If native code is not available or preferred, other alternatives could include: * Using a different library or framework that provides an optimized `isNumber` function. * Implementing the function using a compiled language like C++ or Rust and then interfacing with JavaScript via a bridge or wrapper. * Using a Just-In-Time (JIT) compiler to optimize native code. In summary, the benchmark compares two approaches: native code and Lodash library. Native code provides optimal performance but requires careful implementation and may have browser compatibility issues. The Lodash library simplifies implementation but introduces additional dependencies and potential performance overhead.
Related benchmarks:
Check if array has elements 2
check if arrya
test arr
is this string a single number? array.indexOf VS in array VS in map VS char code VS !isNaN VS +num < 10
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?