Benchmark: Lodash VS Radash

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Tests:

Native
const obj = { a:1, b:1, c:1, d:1, e:1, f:1, g:1, h:1, i:1, } const {a, d, i} = obj; const n = {a, d, i};
Lodash
const obj = { a:1, b:1, c:1, d:1, e:1, f:1, g:1, h:1, i:1, } const n = _.pick(obj, ['a','d','i']);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native
Lodash

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 10; K) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/137.0.0.0 Mobile Safari/537.36 OPR/90.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Opera Mobile 90 on Android

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Native	51159148.0 Ops/sec
Lodash	573321.6 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**What is being tested?**

On the provided JSON, two benchmark tests are defined: "Native" and "Lodash". The tests measure the performance of two approaches:

1. **Native**: This test uses JavaScript's built-in features to destructure an object and extract specific properties. It creates an object `obj` with multiple properties, then uses destructuring assignment to extract the properties `a`, `d`, and `i`. The resulting object is compared to another empty object.
2. **Lodash**: This test uses the popular JavaScript utility library Lodash's `pick` function to achieve the same result as the Native approach. Specifically, it uses `_pick` method with an array of property names `['a','d','i']`.

**Options compared**

The two approaches are being tested for their performance differences:

* **Native**: This approach relies on JavaScript's built-in features and does not require any additional libraries.
* **Lodash**: This approach requires the Lodash library to be included in the test.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Native**
	* Pros:
		+ No additional dependencies required
		+ Lightweight and efficient
		+ Directly leveraging JavaScript's built-in features
	* Cons:
		+ May require more complex code for certain use cases
		+ Limited browser support (if it doesn't support the feature)
2. **Lodash**
	* Pros:
		+ Widely supported and maintained library
		+ Provides a simple and consistent API for common tasks
		+ Can be used with minimal modifications to existing code
	* Cons:
		+ Requires an additional library dependency, which can increase load time
		+ May introduce overhead due to the library's abstraction layer

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of functions for common tasks such as:

* Array manipulation (e.g., `map`, `filter`, `reduce`)
* Object manipulation (e.g., `pick`, `omit`, `clone`)
* String manipulation (e.g., `camelCase`, `kebabCase`)
* Number and date manipulation

The `_pick` function is used in the benchmark to extract specific properties from an object, making it a useful tool for reducing code complexity.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

Neither of the approaches uses any special JavaScript features or syntax that would require additional explanation. However, if we were to discuss other aspects of performance optimization, we might consider factors like:

* **Cache mechanisms**: Can the browser's cache be leveraged to reduce the number of requests and improve load time?
* **Compilation**: How do different JavaScript engines (e.g., V8) optimize code for performance?

Related benchmarks:

Lodash VS Radash (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native vs Lodash

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native

Lodash

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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