Benchmark: Map (Native vs Ramda 0.27.2 vs Lodash 4.17.21) 50k

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.27.2/ramda.min.js"></script>
<script src="//cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

function double(n) {
    return n * 2;
}
var data = [...Array(50000)].map((v, idx) => idx);

Tests:

Ramda
R.map(double, data);
Array (native)
data.map(double);
Lodash
_.map(data, double);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Ramda
Array (native)
Lodash

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 5 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/145.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 145 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Ramda

20K/s

Lodash

18K/s

Array (native)

3K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Ramda	19,808 Ops/sec
Lodash	17,567 Ops/sec
Array (native)	2,688 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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to measure the performance of three different approaches for mapping over an array:

1. Native Array.prototype.map()
2. Ramda 0.27.2 map() function
3. Lodash 4.17.21 _.map() function

The test case uses a sample dataset generated using `Array(50000)`, which is then mapped to double its values.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of three different approaches:

* Native Array.prototype.map(): This is the built-in map function in JavaScript's native array prototype.
* Ramda 0.27.2 map(): This is a functional programming library that provides a map function as part of its API.
* Lodash 4.17.21 _.map(): This is another popular functional programming library that provides a map function as part of its API.

**Pros and Cons**

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

1. **Native Array.prototype.map()**
	* Pros:
		+ Fastest execution time due to native compilation.
		+ Simple and widely supported.
	* Cons:
		+ Not optimized for performance, leading to slower execution times on large datasets.
2. **Ramda 0.27.2 map() function**
	* Pros:
		+ Provides a consistent and predictable performance profile.
		+ Easy to use and integrate with other Ramda functions.
	* Cons:
		+ Slower execution time compared to native Array.prototype.map().
3. **Lodash 4.17.21 _.map() function**
	* Pros:
		+ Similar performance profile to Ramda map(), but potentially faster in some cases.
		+ Wide range of useful utility functions available.
	* Cons:
		+ Can be overkill for simple mapping tasks, adding unnecessary overhead.

**Library Descriptions**

1. **Ramda**: A functional programming library that provides a set of high-order functions for working with arrays and other data structures. The `map()` function is one of its core components.
2. **Lodash**: A utility library that provides a wide range of functions for working with JavaScript, including array manipulation functions like `_.map()`.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax beyond the standard language and the two libraries being compared.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives to these approaches include:

* Using the `forEach()` method instead of `map()`, which can be slightly slower but is also more verbose.
* Using a library like **Underscore.js**, which provides a similar set of array manipulation functions to Lodash, but with some differences in implementation and API.

Overall, this benchmark provides a useful comparison between three different approaches to mapping over arrays, highlighting the trade-offs between performance, simplicity, and consistency.

Map (Native vs Ramda 0.27.2 vs Lodash 4.17.21) 50k (version: 2)

measures the speed of ramdajs 0.27.2 map vs Array's native map vs lodash 4.17.21 map

Comparing performance of: `Ramda vs Array (native) vs Lodash`

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

Ramda

Array (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):

Map (Native vs Ramda 0.27.2 vs Lodash 4.17.21) 50k (version: 2)

measures the speed of ramdajs 0.27.2 map vs Array's native map vs lodash 4.17.21 map

Comparing performance of: Ramda vs Array (native) vs Lodash

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

Ramda

Array (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):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Ramda vs Array (native) vs Lodash`