Benchmark: lodash .foreach vs native foreach vs native forof

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var value = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}, {d: 6542321}, {e: 13123531}]

Tests:

lodash
_.forEach(value, function(v,i) {console.log(v)})
native
value.forEach(function(v,i) {console.log(v)})
native forof
for(const v of value){ console.log(v) }

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

native forof

42K/s

native

40K/s

lodash

35K/s

Fastest: native forof (1.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ native forof: 41,774 ops/sec
• native: 39,724 ops/sec
• lodash: 35,335 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
lodash
native
native forof

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; rv:141.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/141.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 141 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

native

96K/s

native forof

95K/s

lodash

94K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ native	95,805 Ops/sec
native forof	94,829 Ops/sec
lodash	94,233 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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares three approaches for iterating over an array: using the `_forEach` function from the Lodash library, the `foreach` method (which is not a standard JavaScript method, but rather a shorthand for `Array.prototype.forEach`), and the `for...of` loop with `const`.

**Options Compared**

1. **Lodash `_forEach`**: This option uses the `_forEach` function from the Lodash library, which provides a higher-order function that takes an array as its first argument and a callback function as its second argument.
2. **Native `foreach` method**: This option uses the `foreach` method on an array, which is not a standard JavaScript method. However, it's equivalent to calling `Array.prototype.forEach`.
3. **Native `for...of` loop with `const`**: This option uses a traditional `for...of` loop with `const`, where each iteration of the loop logs the current value.

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Lodash `_forEach`**:
	* Pros: Provides a concise way to iterate over arrays, especially for large datasets.
	* Cons: Adds an external dependency (the Lodash library), which may increase load times and dependencies.
2. **Native `foreach` method**: Not recommended, as it's not a standard JavaScript method and may cause confusion.
3. **Native `for...of` loop with `const`**:
	* Pros: No external dependencies or overhead, traditional loop syntax is familiar to many developers.
	* Cons: May be less efficient than using `forEach`, especially for large datasets.

**Library Used**

In this benchmark, the Lodash library is used. Lodash provides a set of utilities that can be used to simplify tasks such as array manipulation, object merging, and more.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

The `for...of` loop with `const` is a relatively new feature in JavaScript (introduced in ECMAScript 2015) that allows iterating over iterable objects like arrays. It's designed to provide a more concise way of working with collections compared to traditional `for` loops.

**Other Alternatives**

For iterating over arrays, other alternatives include:

* Using the `Array.prototype.forEach()` method
* Using a `while` loop or a `do...while` loop to iterate over an array
* Using a library like Underscore.js (which provides similar functionality to Lodash)

In general, for simple use cases, using the native `forEach` method or a traditional `for` loop may be sufficient. However, when working with large datasets or complex logic, libraries like Lodash or Underscore.js can provide valuable assistance in simplifying code and improving performance.

lodash .foreach vs native foreach vs native forof (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `lodash vs native vs native forof`

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

lodash

native

native forof

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

lodash .foreach vs native foreach vs native forof (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash vs native vs native forof

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

lodash

native

native forof

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 6 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 6 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: `lodash vs native vs native forof`