Benchmark: Lodash Every vs Native Every

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.10/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

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

Tests:

lodash.every
_.every(value, (v,i) => {})
native every
value.every((v,i) => {})

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.every
native every

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one month ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/133.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 133 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash.every	100078344.0 Ops/sec
native every	149687408.0 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and considered.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing two approaches: using Lodash (`_`) and native JavaScript (`value.every()`).

* **Lodash**: The benchmark uses Lodash version 4.17.10. Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more.
* **Native JavaScript**: The benchmark compares the performance of using the built-in `every()` method on an array in native JavaScript.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Lodash's `_.every()`**: This function takes a callback function as an argument, which is executed for each element in the array. If all elements pass the test, the function returns `true`. Otherwise, it returns `false`.
2. **Native JavaScript's `value.every()`**: This method takes a callback function as an argument and executes it for each element in the array. Like Lodash's `_.every()`, if all elements pass the test, the method returns `true`. Otherwise, it returns `false`.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Lodash (`_.every()`)**:
	+ Pros:
		- Easier to write and read, as it uses a more concise syntax.
		- More expressive, as it allows for specifying the condition for each element.
	+ Cons:
		- Adds an extra dependency (Lodash) that might not be present in all environments.
		- Might have performance overhead due to the library's execution time.
* **Native JavaScript (`value.every()`)**:
	+ Pros:
		- No additional dependencies or potential performance overhead.
		- More familiar syntax for those already comfortable with native JavaScript.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires more verbose code, which can make it harder to read and write.

**Other Considerations**

* **Context**: The benchmark is running on a desktop browser (Chrome 129) with Mac OS X 10.15.7. This might affect the performance results due to factors like system resources, hardware, and browser-specific optimizations.
* **Test Environment**: The benchmark runs in a simulated environment, which means it doesn't account for external factors like network latency or concurrent executions.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more. Its purpose is to make common tasks easier and more efficient by providing pre-built functions. In this benchmark, Lodash's `_.every()` function is used to compare its performance with the native JavaScript approach.

**Special JS Feature/ Syntax:**

There isn't any specific special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. Both approaches use a standard callback-based syntax for the `every()` method.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative libraries or approaches, consider:

1. **Built-in Array.prototype methods**: Instead of using Lodash's `_.every()`, you can use native JavaScript's `every()` method on an array.
2. **Other utility libraries**: Depending on your specific needs, other utility libraries like Underscore.js or Ramda might offer similar functions to Lodash.

Keep in mind that the choice of library or approach depends on your project requirements, performance constraints, and personal preferences.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash Every vs Native Every (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.every vs native every

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.every

native every

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):