Benchmark: native find vs lodash _.get & _.find

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.15/lodash.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = {
    tags: [{
            'category': 'Rarity',
            'name': 'Covert',
        },
        {
            'category': 'Exterior',
            'name': 'Factory New',
        },
        {
            'user': 'Collection',
            'name': 'Test Collection',
        }
    ]
}

Tests:

native
// Native data.tags ?.find((x) => x?.category === 'Exterior') ?.name ?? null;
lodash
_.get( _.find(data.tags, { category: 'Exterior' }), 'name', null, );

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 provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

MeasureThat.net is testing two approaches to find an element in an array using JavaScript:

1. Native (JavaScript built-in method)
2. Lodash _.get & _.find (Lodash library)

The benchmarking script creates a sample data object with an array of objects, where each object has a "category" and "name" property. The goal is to find the element in the array that matches a specific category ("Exterior") and extract its "name" value.

**Options Compared:**

Two options are being compared:

1. Native (JavaScript built-in method): This approach uses the optional chaining operator (`?.`) followed by the nullish coalescing operator (`??`) to find the desired element.
2. Lodash _.get & _.find (Lodash library): This approach uses two separate functions from the Lodash library:
	* `_.find(data.tags, { category: 'Exterior' })`: finds the first element in the array that matches the specified condition.
	* `_.get(..., 'name', null)`: extracts the "name" value from the found element.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. Native (JavaScript built-in method):
	* Pros:
		+ Faster execution time since it doesn't require an additional library.
		+ More lightweight and concise code.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be as readable or maintainable, especially for complex conditions.
		+ Might have limitations in terms of support for older browsers or environments.
2. Lodash _.get & _.find (Lodash library):
	* Pros:
		+ More readable and maintainable code, thanks to the explicit separation of concerns between finding the element and extracting its value.
		+ Can be more flexible and adaptable to different use cases.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires an additional library, which may incur a small performance overhead.
		+ Code might be slightly longer and less concise.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like array manipulation, object transformation, and more. In this benchmark, the `_.get` and `_.find` functions are used to simplify the code and improve readability. The `_.get` function takes three arguments: the value to extract from, the key path, and a default value to return if the key is not present.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax:**

None of the benchmarking scripts use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would be unfamiliar to most software engineers.

**Other Alternatives:**

If you don't want to use Lodash, there are alternative approaches:

1. Vanilla JavaScript:
	* Use `Array.prototype.find()` instead of `_.find()`.
	* Implement the same logic manually without using the optional chaining operator (`?.`) or nullish coalescing operator (`??`).
2. Other libraries:
	* You could use other array manipulation libraries like Ramda, Underscore.js, or even Svelte's built-in functions.

Keep in mind that while alternative approaches exist, Lodash provides a convenient and readable way to perform common tasks, making it a popular choice among developers.

Related benchmarks:

native find vs lodash _.get & _.find (version: 0)

Lodash vs Native

Comparing performance of: native vs lodash

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

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):