Benchmark: lodash map vs es6 map v2

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

const j = [1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 35, 49, 68, 74, 86, 93, 110, 121, 135, 141, 156, 157, 158, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168]

function lodashmap () {
  arr = _.map(j, function(el){
    return el * 10
  })
  console.log(arr)
}

function jsmap () {
  arr = j.map(function(el){
    return el * 10
  })
  console.log(arr)
}

function lodashreduce () {
  arr = _.reduce(j, (els, el) => {
    els.push(el * 10)
    // console.log(els)
    return els
  }, [])
  console.log(arr)
}

function jsreduce () {
  arr = j.reduce(function(els, el) {
    els.push(el * 10)
    return els
  }, [])
  console.log(arr)
}

Tests:

lodash map
lodashmap()
native map
jsmap()
lodash reduce
lodashreduce()
native reduce
jsreduce()

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 36 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 36 runs

native map

145K/s

native reduce

144K/s

lodash map

144K/s

lodash reduce

144K/s

View exact numbers

✓ native map: 144,602 ops/sec
• native reduce: 144,387 ops/sec
• lodash map: 144,322 ops/sec
• lodash reduce: 144,132 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash map
native map
lodash reduce
native reduce

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

lodash map

173K/s

native map

159K/s

lodash reduce

147K/s

native reduce

125K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ lodash map	173,238 Ops/sec
native map	158,922 Ops/sec
lodash reduce	147,441 Ops/sec
native reduce	124,862 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks.

**Benchmark Definition JSON:**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark test case for comparing the performance of two approaches:

1. **Lodash map**: uses the `_map` function from the Lodash library to transform an array.
2. **Native map (ES6)**: uses the built-in `map()` method of JavaScript arrays to achieve the same result.

Both approaches are used in conjunction with a second function, `reduce()`, which is also compared between two implementations:

1. **Lodash reduce**: uses the `_reduce` function from Lodash to accumulate values in an array.
2. **Native reduce (ES6)**: uses the built-in `reduce()` method of JavaScript arrays for the same purpose.

**Options Compared:**

The benchmark compares the performance of the following options:

* Lodash map vs Native map (ES6)
* Lodash reduce vs Native reduce (ES6)

**Pros and Cons:**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Lodash map**:
	* Pros: easier to read and write, especially for developers familiar with functional programming concepts.
	* Cons: requires an additional library dependency, which may add overhead in certain scenarios.
2. **Native map (ES6)**:
	* Pros: built-in method, no additional library dependencies required.
	* Cons: syntax might be less readable for some developers, especially those without prior experience with ES6.

1. **Lodash reduce**:
	* Pros: concise and expressive syntax, well-suited for accumulating values in an array.
	* Cons: still requires the Lodash library dependency.
2. **Native reduce (ES6)**:
	* Pros: similar to native map, no additional library dependencies required.
	* Cons: syntax might be less readable for some developers.

**Library and Purpose:**

The Lodash library provides a set of utility functions that make common programming tasks easier. In this benchmark, the `_map` and `_reduce` functions are used to transform and accumulate arrays, respectively. The library is widely used in JavaScript development due to its extensive feature set and convenient syntax.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax:**

The benchmark uses ES6 features (such as `const`, arrow functions, and template literals) to write the test code. These features provide a concise way of writing code and are commonly used in modern JavaScript applications.

**Other Alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternatives to Lodash, here are some popular options:

* **Underscore.js**: another popular utility library that provides many of the same functions as Lodash.
* **Moment.js**: a library for working with dates and times, which can be used in conjunction with other libraries or built-in methods.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different syntax and features compared to Lodash, so it's essential to choose the one that best fits your project's needs.

In summary, this benchmark provides a useful comparison of two approaches for transforming arrays: Lodash map vs Native map (ES6), and Lodash reduce vs Native reduce (ES6). The results will help you understand the performance differences between using a library versus built-in methods in JavaScript.

lodash map vs es6 map v2 (version: 5)

Comparing performance of: `lodash map vs native map vs lodash reduce vs native reduce`

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

lodash map

native map

lodash reduce

native reduce

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 36 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 36 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

lodash map vs es6 map v2 (version: 5)

Comparing performance of: lodash map vs native map vs lodash reduce vs native reduce

Created: 8 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

lodash map

native map

lodash reduce

native reduce

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 36 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 36 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `lodash map vs native map vs lodash reduce vs native reduce`