Benchmark: native find vs lodash 4.1.21 _.find

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.core.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var users = [
  { 'user': 'joey',  'age': 32 },
  { 'user': 'ross',    'age': 41 },
  { 'user': 'chandler', 'age': 39 }
]

Tests:

array find
// Native users.find(function (o) { return o.age < 40; })
_.find
_.find(users, function (o) { return o.age < 40; })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
array find
_.find

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/135.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 135 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
array find	135534864.0 Ops/sec
_.find	63166588.0 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 explain what's being tested, compared, and the pros and cons of each approach.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is designed to compare two approaches: using the native JavaScript `find()` method versus using the `_find` function from the Lodash library.

**Native JavaScript `find()` method**

The native `find()` method is used in the first test case:
```javascript
users.find(function (o) { return o.age < 40; })
```
This approach uses a callback function to iterate over the array and returns the first element that satisfies the condition. The benefits of this approach include:

* It's a built-in JavaScript method, so it's likely to be implemented efficiently.
* It doesn't require an additional library.

However, there are some potential drawbacks:

* It may have performance issues due to the need for a callback function, which can lead to slower execution times compared to other approaches.
* The performance may vary depending on the browser and JavaScript engine used.

**Lodash `_find` function**

The second test case uses the Lodash `_find` function:
```javascript
_.find(users, function (o) { return o.age < 40; })
```
This approach uses a higher-order function to iterate over the array and returns the first element that satisfies the condition. The benefits of this approach include:

* It's often implemented in a more efficient way compared to the native `find()` method.
* It provides additional features, such as support for multiple filters.

However, there are some potential drawbacks:

* It requires an additional library (Lodash), which may not be available or required by all projects.
* The performance may vary depending on the browser and JavaScript engine used, but it's often considered faster than the native `find()` method.

**Other considerations**

In addition to these two approaches, there are other ways to achieve this functionality, such as using `Array.prototype.filter()` or `Array.prototype.forEach()`. However, they might not be directly comparable in terms of performance.

For example:
```javascript
const result = users.filter(function (o) { return o.age < 40; });
```
or
```javascript
users.forEach(function (o) { if (o.age < 40) console.log(o); });
```
These approaches can be slower than the native `find()` method or the Lodash `_find` function, especially for large datasets.

**Library and syntax**

In this benchmark, the Lodash library is used. It's a popular utility library that provides various functions for working with arrays, objects, and more.

The syntax used in this benchmark is JavaScript, specifically ES6+ syntax. The `let` keyword is used to declare variables, which is a more modern and concise way of declaring variables compared to the traditional `var` keyword.

Overall, this benchmark provides an interesting comparison between two approaches: using the native JavaScript `find()` method versus using the Lodash `_find` function. By testing these approaches, developers can gain insight into the performance differences between them and choose the best approach for their specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

native find vs lodash 4.1.21 _.find (version: 0)

Compare the new ES6 spread operator with the traditional concat() method

Comparing performance of: array find vs _.find

Created: one year ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

array find

_.find

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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