Benchmark: lodash times vs new Array() && for loop

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var length = 10
var message = "I like this website."

Tests:

Lodash
var results = _.times(length, () => { return { data: { notifications: {}, metadata: {} }, message, } });
Native Array & For Loop
var results = new Array(length); for (var i = 0; i < length; i++) { results[i] = { data: { notifications: {}, metadata: {} }, message, }; }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Native Array & For Loop

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/124.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 124 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	1984433.9 Ops/sec
Native Array & For Loop	1207514.2 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 definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition**

The website, MeasureThat.net, is comparing two approaches to generate an array of objects in JavaScript:

1. Using Lodash (`lodash.times`)
2. A native implementation using `new Array()` and a for loop.

The goal is to measure which approach is faster.

**Options Compared**

* **Lodash (`lodash.times`)**: This method uses the Lodash library, a utility library that provides various functions to make JavaScript code more concise and efficient.
* **Native Implementation (Array & For Loop)**: This method uses the native `new Array()` function to create an array and a for loop to populate it with objects.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Lodash (`lodash.times`)**:
	+ Pros:
		- Convenient and concise syntax
		- Often faster than native implementations due to optimized JavaScript engine handling
	+ Cons:
		- Additional dependency on the Lodash library, which may not be included in all environments
		- May have overhead from the library itself
* **Native Implementation (Array & For Loop)**:
	+ Pros:
		- No additional dependencies or overhead
		- Can be optimized for specific use cases and environments
	+ Cons:
		- More verbose syntax compared to Lodash
		- May not be as efficient due to the loop overhead

**Library Used**

The `lodash.times` method uses the Lodash library, which is a popular utility library for JavaScript. Lodash provides various functions to make JavaScript code more concise and efficient, including `times`, which generates an array of objects.

**JavaScript Feature/Syntax**

No special JavaScript features or syntax are used in these test cases. The comparison focuses on the performance difference between two approaches.

**Alternative Approaches**

Other alternatives for generating arrays of objects might include:

* Using Array.prototype.map() with a callback function
* Using a library like Underscore.js (similar to Lodash)
* Implementing a custom array generator using a loop or recursion
* Utilizing modern JavaScript features like arrow functions and template literals

These alternative approaches would require additional benchmarking to determine their performance characteristics.

Related benchmarks:

lodash times vs new Array() && for loop (version: 0)

compare the performance of generating a new array with lodash.times against a native implementation using `new Array() and a for loop`.

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Native Array & For Loop

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Native Array & For Loop

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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