Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Lodash Chain vs Native vs Flow
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Chain vs Native (with &&) vs Native (without &&) vs Flow
Created:
3 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script> <script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/g/lodash@4(lodash.min.js+lodash.fp.min.js)'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var data = Array(10000000).fill({ a: 'a', b: 1 });
Tests:
Chain
_.chain(data).filter(f => f.a === 'a').filter(f => f.b === 1).filter(f => f.b + 1 === 2).map(f => f.a).filter(f => f === 'a').value()
Native (with &&)
data.filter(f => f.a === 'a' && f.b === 1 && f.b + 1 === 2).map(f => f.a).filter(f => f === 'a')
Native (without &&)
data.filter(f => f.a === 'a').filter(f => f.b === 1).filter(f => f.b + 1 === 2).map(f => f.a).filter(f => f === 'a')
Flow
_.flow( _.filter(f => f.a === 'a'), _.filter(f => f.b === 1), _.filter(f => f.b + 1 === 2), _.map(f => f.a), _.filter(f => f === 'a') )(data)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Chain
Native (with &&)
Native (without &&)
Flow
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
10 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/137.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 137 on Windows
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
Chain
1.4 Ops/sec
Native (with &&)
2.8 Ops/sec
Native (without &&)
1.4 Ops/sec
Flow
1.5 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
**Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website where users can create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks to compare the performance of different approaches, libraries, and syntax features. The provided benchmark definition json represents a simple filter-based data processing pipeline using Lodash library functions: `chain`, `flow`, native (with &&), and native (without &&). **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark consists of four test cases: 1. **Chain**: Uses the `_.chain()` method to create a chain of Lodash functions, filtering the data step-by-step. 2. **Native (with &&)**: Filters the data using multiple conditions with the logical AND operator (`&&`). 3. **Native (without &&)**: Similar to the previous one, but without using the logical AND operator. 4. **Flow**: Uses the `_.flow()` method to create a sequence of Lodash functions, filtering the data step-by-step. **Options Compared** * `Chain`: vs `_.chain()` * `Native (with &&)` vs `&&` operator * `Native (without &&)` vs no logical AND operator * `Flow`: vs `_.flow()` **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** 1. **Chain** * Pros: step-by-step filtering, readable code, and easy to maintain. * Cons: might be slower due to the overhead of creating a chain of functions. 2. **Native (with &&)** * Pros: simple, efficient, and widely supported in modern browsers. * Cons: more complex code, harder to read and debug, especially for large pipelines. 3. **Native (without &&)** * Pros: similar performance to the native with && approach, but without the complexity of the operator. * Cons: requires multiple condition checks, which can be slower. 4. **Flow** * Pros: step-by-step filtering, readable code, and easy to maintain, similar to Chain. * Cons: slightly slower due to the overhead of creating a sequence of functions. **Libraries Used** * Lodash: A popular JavaScript utility library providing functional programming helpers. * `_.chain()`: A method that creates a chain of Lodash functions, allowing for step-by-step filtering and transformation of data. * `_.flow()`: A method that creates a sequence of Lodash functions, also allowing for step-by-step filtering and transformation of data. **Special JS Features/Syntax** None mentioned in the benchmark definition. **Other Alternatives** For testing and benchmarking JavaScript code, MeasureThat.net is one of the few platforms offering a straightforward and user-friendly interface. Other alternatives include: * jsperf: A simple, web-based tool for benchmarking JavaScript code. * Benchmark.js: A library providing a simple way to write benchmarks in JavaScript. * Jest or Mocha with a custom benchmarking setup. These alternatives may offer more features and flexibility than MeasureThat.net but require more expertise and effort to set up.
Related benchmarks:
Lodash Chain vs Native (with &&) vs Native (without &&) vs Flow
Lodash Chain vs Native (with &&) vs Native (without &&) vs Flow with random data
Lodash Chain (with &&) vs Native (with &&) vs Native (without &&) vs Flow
Lodash Chain vs Native (with &&) vs Native (without &&) vs Flow, with actual filtering
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?