Benchmark: Lodash isEmpty vs Native Javascript

Lodash isEmpty vs Native Javascript (version: 2)

This benchmark compares the performance of lodash's `isEmpty` function with native JavaScript code for checking if an object is empty. The lodash `isEmpty` function checks if a value is an empty object, collection, map, or set. The native JavaScript code checks if an object has no own enumerable string keyed properties.

Comparing performance of: `_.isEmpty vs Native JavaScript`

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js" integrity="sha512-WFN04846sdKMIP5LKNphMaWzU7YpMyCU245etK3g/2ARYbPK9Ub18eG+ljU96qKRCWh+quCY7yefSmlkQw1ANQ==" crossorigin="anonymous" referrerpolicy="no-referrer"></script>

Script Preparation code:

cspSrcs = {
    key: 'value'
};

Tests:

_.isEmpty
_.isEmpty(cspSrcs);
Native JavaScript
Object.keys(cspSrcs).length === 0 && cspSrcs.constructor === Object;

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 42 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 42 runs

Native JavaScript

7.6M/s

_.isEmpty

6.5M/s

Fastest: Native JavaScript (1.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Native JavaScript: 7,645,096 ops/sec
• _.isEmpty: 6,455,400 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.isEmpty
Native JavaScript

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/137.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 137 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Native JavaScript

46.9M/s

_.isEmpty

32.4M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Native JavaScript	46,924,752 Ops/sec
_.isEmpty	32,369,498 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 Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:

1. **Lodash `isEmpty` function**: This is a utility function from the popular JavaScript library Lodash that checks if a value (e.g., an object) is empty.
2. **Native JavaScript code**: This approach uses built-in JavaScript features to check if an object has no own enumerable string keyed properties.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares these two approaches for checking if an object is empty:

1. **Lodash `isEmpty` function**: Uses a pre-defined implementation of the `isEmpty` function from Lodash.
2. **Native JavaScript code**: Employs built-in JavaScript features, specifically:
	* Checking if an object has no own enumerable string keyed properties using `Object.keys()` and comparison with 0.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Lodash `isEmpty` function**:
	* Pros: Faster execution (according to the benchmark results) since it's a specialized implementation.
	* Cons: Requires Lodash library inclusion, which might add overhead for some use cases.
2. **Native JavaScript code**:
	* Pros: No additional dependencies required, as it uses built-in features.
	* Cons: Might be slower than the Lodash implementation (according to the benchmark results).

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, the Lodash library is used for its `isEmpty` function.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There's no specific JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The test cases only involve standard JavaScript operations and comparisons.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to check if an object is empty, other alternatives could include:

1. Using `Object.keys()` as shown in the native JavaScript code: `Object.keys(cspSrcs).length === 0 && cspSrcs.constructor === Object;`
2. Using a custom implementation based on the `hasOwnProperty()` method and checking for empty properties.
3. Using libraries like Underscore.js (similar to Lodash) or other utility libraries that provide an `isEmpty` function.

These alternatives might have different trade-offs in terms of performance, dependencies, and code complexity compared to the Lodash implementation and native JavaScript approach tested in this benchmark.

Lodash isEmpty vs Native Javascript (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: _.isEmpty vs Native JavaScript

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

_.isEmpty

Native JavaScript

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 42 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 42 runs

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: `_.isEmpty vs Native JavaScript`