Benchmark: Lodash.js vs Native test2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var max2 = 10000; 

var arr2 = [];
for (var i = 0; i <= max2; i++) { arr2.push({email: i}); }

sendtoAllbyRole = arr2
userEmail=[]

Tests:

Native
sendtoAllbyRole.forEach(user => { user.email && userEmail.push(user.email) })
Lodash.js filter
userEmail = _.map(_.filter(sendtoAllbyRole, (user) => user.id), 'id')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native
Lodash.js filter

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 and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches:

1. **Native**: Using native JavaScript methods to filter and map an array.
2. **Lodash.js filter**: Using the popular Lodash library's `filter` function to achieve the same result.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these two approaches on a specific test case, which involves filtering an array of objects and then mapping over it to extract a specific property (`email`).

**Pros and Cons**

### Native Approach

Pros:

* **Native performance**: Since the `filter` and `map` methods are part of the standard JavaScript API, they should be highly optimized for native execution.
* **No dependencies**: The benchmark runs with no external dependencies or libraries, making it a true measure of native performance.

Cons:

* **Code complexity**: The `filter` and `map` methods can add some complexity to the code, especially if you're not familiar with them.
* **Potential browser differences**: Although Chrome 112 is specified as the execution environment, there might be differences in behavior across other browsers or versions.

### Lodash.js filter Approach

Pros:

* **Familiar syntax**: Using a popular library like Lodash can make the code more readable and easier to understand for developers familiar with it.
* **Optimized performance**: Lodash is optimized for performance and often provides better execution times than native alternatives.

Cons:

* **External dependency**: The benchmark relies on the Lodash library being loaded from an external source, which might introduce additional overhead or inconsistencies in execution environment.
* **Potential caching issues**: If the Lodash library is cached by the browser or device, it could affect the results of this benchmark.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash (pronounced "lodash") is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functional programming helpers. The `filter` function is one of its most commonly used methods, which takes a callback function as an argument to determine which elements to include in the resulting array.

In this benchmark, Lodash's `filter` method is used to remove objects from the `sendtoAllbyRole` array that don't have an `id` property. The resulting filtered array is then passed to Lodash's `map` method to extract the `email` property of each object.

**Other Considerations**

* **ES6 features**: Neither the native nor Lodash approaches use ES6+ features, so this benchmark should be compatible with older browsers and environments.
* **Device platform**: The benchmark is run on a desktop device with Linux as the operating system, which might affect the results of this benchmark if you were to test it on mobile devices or other platforms.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other approaches could include:

* Using other libraries like Ramda or Liskelid for functional programming.
* Implementing custom filtering and mapping logic in JavaScript without relying on external libraries.
* Testing with different data structures, such as arrays of objects with nested properties, to further stress the performance of these approaches.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.js vs Native test2 (version: 0)

asd

Comparing performance of: Native vs Lodash.js filter

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native

Lodash.js filter

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):