Benchmark: lodash.isFinite vs Number.isFinite

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var value = 3.4514616;

Tests:

lodash
_.isFinite(value);
Number native
Number.isFinite(value);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash
Number native

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/132.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 132 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash	135976256.0 Ops/sec
Number native	155368016.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to explain the JavaScript microbenchmark test case provided.

**Overview**

The benchmark tests the performance of two methods: `_.isFinite(value)` from the Lodash library and `Number.isFinite(value)` (the native JavaScript function). Both functions are used to check if a given number is finite or not. The goal is to determine which method is faster for this specific use case.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Lodash**: The `_isFinite` function from the Lodash library.
2. **Native JavaScript**: The `Number.isFinite(value)` function, which is a built-in JavaScript method.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Lodash:**

Pros:

* Often used in production code for its convenience and flexibility (e.g., it can check if an object has certain properties).
* Can be useful if you need to check the type or value of multiple variables at once.

Cons:

* Introduces additional overhead due to the size of the library and the overhead of function calls.
* May not be optimized for performance, especially in critical paths like benchmarks.

**Native JavaScript:**

Pros:

* Built-in, so no external library dependencies.
* Often optimized for performance, as it's a fundamental part of the language.

Cons:

* Only works with numbers (and some other numeric types), limiting its use to specific use cases.
* May not be as convenient or flexible as Lodash in certain situations.

**Library and Purpose**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more. The `_isFinite` function is part of the library's `object` module, which offers various functions for working with objects.

In this benchmark, Lodash is used to check if a number is finite using its `_isFinite` function.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

None are explicitly mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that some JavaScript features or syntax might be present in the actual code being tested, such as:

* ES6/ES7+ syntax (e.g., arrow functions, template literals)
* Modern JavaScript features like `let`, `const`, and `var` declarations

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative methods for checking if a number is finite, here are a few options:

1. **Math.trunc**: This method truncates the given number to its nearest integer.
2. **Number.EPSILON**: A small value that can be used to check if two numbers are close enough to be considered equal (i.e., not finite).
3. **isFinite() with some workarounds**: Depending on the specific requirements, you might need to use a custom implementation of `isFinite()` for certain numeric types.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different trade-offs and performance characteristics compared to using the built-in `Number.isFinite(value)` function or Lodash's `_isFinite` method.

Related benchmarks:

lodash.isFinite vs Number.isFinite (version: 0)

Comparing performance of lodash vs Number.isFinite

Comparing performance of: lodash vs Number native

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash

Number native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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