Benchmark: Object.assign vs Lodash.assign

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var person = {name: 'Frederick', lastName: 'Corcino Alejo'};

Tests:

Lodash Assing
_.assign({}, person, {age: 15});
Native Assing
Object.assign({}, person, {age: 15});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash Assing
Native Assing

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/143.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 143 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash Assing	9828643.0 Ops/sec
Native Assing	21528190.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches for assigning values to an object: `Object.assign` (native JavaScript) and `_.assign` from the Lodash library.

**Options compared:**

1. **Native JavaScript (`Object.assign`)**: This is a built-in method in JavaScript that creates a new object by copying properties from one or more source objects.
2. **Lodash library (`_._assign`)**: The Lodash library provides a utility function `_.` for functional programming, which includes an `assign` method that can be used to merge objects.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **Native JavaScript (`Object.assign`)**:
	* Pros: Faster execution time, no additional dependencies required.
	* Cons: Not as flexible or powerful as Lodash's `_.assign`, may not work with all data types (e.g., null or undefined values).
2. **Lodash library (`_._assign`)**:
	* Pros: More flexible and powerful than native JavaScript implementation, works with a wider range of data types.
	* Cons: Requires an additional dependency (the Lodash library), may have slightly slower execution time compared to native JavaScript.

**Other considerations:**

The benchmark also records information about the test device, browser, operating system, and number of executions per second. This data can be useful for identifying patterns or trends in performance across different devices and browsers.

**Library description (Lodash):**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of functions for functional programming tasks, including array manipulation, string formatting, and object manipulation (like `_.assign`).

**Special JS feature/syntax: None mentioned**

Since there's no specific JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark, we can focus on the performance comparison between native JavaScript and Lodash's `_.assign`.

**Alternatives:**

Other alternatives for assigning values to an object include:

1. `Object.create()`: A method that creates a new object by copying properties from a prototype.
2. Using the spread operator (`{ ... }`) with destructuring assignment.
3. Creating a new object using the `new` keyword and assigning properties manually.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics compared to native JavaScript or Lodash's `_.assign`.

Related benchmarks:

Object.assign vs Lodash.assign (version: 0)

Measuring approaches performance

Comparing performance of: Lodash Assing vs Native Assing

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Lodash Assing

Native Assing

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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