Benchmark: lodash.each vs Object.forEach

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var values = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}]

Tests:

lodash
_.map(values, function(v,i) {})
Array
values.map(function(v,i) {})

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash
Array

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.

I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing two JavaScript functions: `_.map()` from Lodash (a utility library) and `Array.prototype.map()`, which is a native JavaScript function.

**What are they testing?**

These two functions will be executed on the same input array (`values`) with different configurations. The goal is to measure the performance difference between these two approaches.

**Options compared:**

1. **Lodash's `_map()`**: This function takes an array and a callback function as arguments, which will be called for each element in the array.
2. **Native `Array.prototype.map()`:** This function also takes an array and a callback function as arguments, but it uses the native JavaScript engine.

**Pros and Cons:**

* Lodash's `_map()`:
	+ Pros:
		- Often preferred due to its concise syntax and explicitness.
		- May be faster than the native implementation due to optimizations by the Lodash team.
	+ Cons:
		- Additional library dependency, which can lead to slower execution times compared to the native implementation.
* Native `Array.prototype.map()`:
	+ Pros:
		- Built-in function, so no additional dependencies are required.
		- Can be faster in certain cases due to optimizations by the JavaScript engine.
	+ Cons:
		- May have less explicit syntax than Lodash's `_map()`, making it harder to understand for some developers.

**Library used:**

Lodash (version 4.16.0) is a popular utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as string manipulation, array and object operations, and more. In this benchmark, `_.map()` is used from Lodash's source code.

**Special JS feature/syntax:**

This benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax, so it should be accessible to most software engineers.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives for implementing the mapping function could include:

* Using a custom implementation without relying on either `_.map()` or `Array.prototype.map()`.
* Using other libraries that provide similar functionality, such as Ramda.
* Using JavaScript ES6+ features like `map()` and arrow functions to simplify the code.

Keep in mind that these alternatives would likely have different performance characteristics and may not be directly comparable to Lodash's `_map()` or the native implementation.

Related benchmarks:

lodash.each vs Object.forEach (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash vs Array

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash

Array

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):