Benchmark: lodash eachfor - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:


var arr = [{key:0,value:'majo'},{key:1,value:'aaaads'},{key:2,value:'cdsdfs'}];

Tests:

lodash
_.forEach(arr,item=>{});
native
arr.forEach(element => {});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash
native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'll explain the benchmark in detail, covering what's being tested, the options compared, pros and cons of each approach, and other considerations.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches: using the built-in `forEach` method (native) versus a library function from Lodash (`lodash`). The test case creates an array `arr` with three elements and applies a simple callback function to each element. The objective is to determine which approach is faster.

**Options compared**

There are two options being compared:

1. **Native `forEach`**: This method is built into the JavaScript language and is executed by the engine (V8 in this case). It's a straightforward way to iterate over an array.
2. **Lodash `_lodash.forEach`**: Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a wide range of functions for common tasks, including iteration. The `forEach` function from Lodash is implemented using the native `forEach` method under the hood but adds additional features like argument validation and support for iteratees (functions).

**Pros and Cons**

1. **Native `forEach`**:
	* Pros:
		+ Faster execution, as it's a built-in method.
		+ More efficient memory usage, since no additional function overhead is added.
	* Cons:
		+ Limited flexibility, as the callback function must conform to the native `forEach` signature.
2. **Lodash `_lodash.forEach`**:
	* Pros:
		+ Adds features like argument validation and support for iteratees.
		+ Can be more convenient for developers familiar with Lodash's API.
	* Cons:
		+ Slower execution, due to the additional function overhead.
		+ Larger memory usage, since an extra function object is created.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a utility library developed by Isaac Zalcik in 2012. It provides over 160 functions for common tasks like array manipulation, object transformation, and event handling. The `forEach` function from Lodash is implemented using the native `forEach` method to ensure compatibility across different browsers and environments.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There doesn't appear to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. The test case only uses standard JavaScript syntax for creating arrays, defining functions, and iterating over them.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for iterating over arrays include:

1. `for` loop: A traditional loop construct that's often used instead of `forEach`.
2. `Array.prototype.forEach.call()`: This method is similar to the native `forEach` method but can be used with any array-like object.
3. Third-party libraries like Ramda or Lodash's own `_map` and `_reduce` functions.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics or use cases compared to the native `forEach` method or Lodash's `forEach` function.

Related benchmarks:

lodash eachfor (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash vs native

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash

native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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