Benchmark: Unerscore.keys vs object.keys

HTML Preparation code:

<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.8.3/underscore.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var o = {}
for(var i = 0; i < 101; i++) {
	o[i] = new Date()
}

Tests:

_.keys
_.keys(o)
Object.keys
Object.keys(o)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.keys
Object.keys

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.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares two approaches to get the keys of an object: `underscore.keys()` and `Object.keys()`. The benchmark creates an array of 101 objects, each containing a new Date object as its property. The script preparation code generates this data, and the HTML preparation code includes the necessary library for the underscore function.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **`underscore.keys()`**: This function is part of the Underscore.js library, which provides functional programming helpers in JavaScript. `underscore.keys()` returns an array of the keys of an object.
2. **`Object.keys()`**: This is a built-in JavaScript method that returns an array of the property names (keys) of an object.

**Pros and Cons**

**Underscore.js (`_.keys()`)**

Pros:

* Fast: As a native function, `underscore.keys()` has direct access to the underlying implementation.
* Lightweight: Underscore.js is a small library, making it easy to include in projects.

Cons:

* External dependency: Measuring the performance of `underscore.keys()` requires including the entire Underscore.js library.
* Steeper learning curve: Familiarity with functional programming concepts and the Underscore.js API may be necessary for optimal performance.

**Built-in JavaScript (`Object.keys()`)**

Pros:

* No external dependencies: This approach only relies on the built-in JavaScript implementation, making it a straightforward choice.
* Wide adoption: Since `Object.keys()` is a native function, most developers are familiar with its usage.

Cons:

* Possible implementation variations: Although unlikely, browser-specific implementations of `Object.keys()` might affect performance.
* Potential overhead: Some older browsers or environments may have slower or less efficient implementations of `Object.keys()`, affecting performance.

**Library Considerations**

Underscore.js is a popular utility library for JavaScript. Its primary purpose is to provide functional programming helpers, making it easy to write concise and expressive code. In this benchmark, `underscore.keys()` serves as a useful alternative to the built-in `Object.keys()` function.

**Special JavaScript Features or Syntax**

None are mentioned in this specific benchmark.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to measure the performance of other object key extraction methods, consider these alternatives:

1. **`for...in` loop**: This approach iterates over the object's own enumerable properties using a `for...in` loop.
2. **`Object.getOwnPropertyNames()`**: Similar to `Object.keys()`, but also includes non-enumerable properties in the result set.

These alternatives may have different performance characteristics and use cases compared to `underscore.keys()` and `Object.keys()`.

Related benchmarks:

Unerscore.keys vs object.keys (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.keys vs Object.keys

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.keys

Object.keys

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):