Benchmark: lodash.mapKeys vs Iterating over Object.keys

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var value = {a: 30310, b: 100303, c: 3040494};

Tests:

lodash.mapKeys
_.mapKeys(value, k => k + '-changed')
native
Object.assign({}, ...Object.keys(value).map(k => ({ [k + '-changed']: value[k] })))

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.mapKeys
native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 26 days ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/148.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 148 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash.mapKeys	6009535.0 Ops/sec
native	2513752.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark definition and options being compared.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches to iterate over an object and create a new object with modified key-value pairs:

1. **Lodash `_.mapKeys`**: This function takes an object, a callback function, and returns a new object with the same keys but modified according to the callback.
2. **Native JavaScript iteration**: This approach uses `Object.keys()` to get an array of keys from the original object, maps over it using `Array.prototype.map()`, creates a new object using `Object.assign()`, and updates each key-value pair.

**Options being compared:**

* Lodash `_.mapKeys`
* Native JavaScript iteration

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Lodash `_.mapKeys`**:
	* Pros:
		+ More concise and readable code
		+ Less prone to errors due to the callback function providing a clear contract for modification
	* Cons:
		+ Requires an additional library (Lodash)
		+ May have performance overhead due to the creation of a new function object on each execution
2. **Native JavaScript iteration**:
	* Pros:
		+ No external libraries required
		+ Can be optimized for performance by using native functions and caching intermediate results
	* Cons:
		+ More verbose code, potentially leading to errors due to complex logic
		+ May require more manual bookkeeping (e.g., managing the array of keys)

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as data manipulation, object creation, and more. In this benchmark, `_.mapKeys` is used to create a new object with modified key-value pairs.

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

The benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax, so there's no need to explain anything in that regard.

**Other alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, some options could include:

* Using `Object.entries()` and `Array.prototype.reduce()` for a more concise solution
* Implementing your own custom mapping function using recursion or iteration
* Utilizing other libraries like `ramda` or `functional-programming` frameworks

Keep in mind that each alternative approach will have its pros and cons, and the best choice depends on the specific requirements of your project.

In terms of benchmark results, the provided data shows:

* Firefox 124 with an execution rate of approximately 4.79 million iterations per second for Lodash `_.mapKeys`
* Firefox 124 with an execution rate of approximately 2.78 million iterations per second for native JavaScript iteration

These results suggest that Lodash `_.mapKeys` is currently performing better than the native JavaScript iteration approach in this benchmark, but keep in mind that performance can vary depending on the specific use case and environment.

Related benchmarks:

lodash.mapKeys vs Iterating over Object.keys (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.mapKeys vs native

Created: 8 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.mapKeys

native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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