Benchmark: Length vs Lodash Size 100k

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var arr = new Array(100000).fill("");

Tests:

Length
arr.length
Lodash Size
_.size(arr);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Length
Lodash Size

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/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Length	139315600.0 Ops/sec
Lodash Size	23234646.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in the provided JSON benchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is created by comparing two approaches to measuring the size of an array: using JavaScript's built-in `length` property, and using the popular utility library Lodash's `_size()` function.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **JavaScript's built-in `length` property**: This approach simply returns the number of elements in the array, without any additional processing or formatting.
2. **Lodash's `_size()` function**: This approach uses the Lodash library to calculate the size of the array, which may involve additional processing or formatting steps.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

* **JavaScript's built-in `length` property**:
	+ Pros: Lightweight, easy to understand, no dependencies on external libraries.
	+ Cons: May not provide accurate results for certain data types (e.g., strings, arrays with complex structures).
* **Lodash's `_size()` function**:
	+ Pros: Provides accurate results even for complex data types, reduces the risk of errors or inconsistencies.
	+ Cons: Requires an additional external library, may have performance overhead due to dependency loading.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing between these two approaches, consider the following factors:

* **Accuracy**: If you need precise measurements, especially for complex data types, Lodash's `_size()` function might be a better choice.
* **Performance**: For simple cases, JavaScript's built-in `length` property is likely to be faster and more efficient.
* **Maintenance**: Using an external library like Lodash introduces additional dependencies and potential maintenance costs.

**Library - Lodash**

Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a wide range of functions for various tasks, such as array manipulation, string processing, and more. The `_size()` function specifically calculates the size of arrays and other data structures.

In this benchmark, the test case uses the `_.size(arr)` syntax to call the Lodash `_size()` function on the input array `arr`.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The script preparation code and HTML preparation code are straightforward JavaScript code that sets up a simple array and includes the Lodash library.

If you have any further questions or need additional clarification, feel free to ask!

Related benchmarks:

Length vs Lodash Size 100k (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Length vs Lodash Size

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Length

Lodash Size

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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