Benchmark: _.isEmpty vs Object.keys.length vs .length

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.11/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

window.obj = {};

for (var i = 0, len = 100; i < len; i++) {
  obj['key' + i] = 'value' + i;
}

Tests:

_.isEmpty
_.isEmpty(window.obj);
Object.keys().length
Object.keys(window.obj).length === 0;
.length
!window.obj.length

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.isEmpty
Object.keys().length
.length

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 break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case on the MeasureThat.net website. The test compares the performance of three different approaches to check if an object is empty:

1. Using `_.isEmpty()` from the Lodash library.
2. Using `Object.keys()` followed by `length === 0`.
3. Directly checking `window.obj.length`.

**Options compared**

The test compares the execution speed of each approach across multiple executions (measured in executions per second).

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **_.isEmpty(window.obj)**:
	* Pros: More concise and readable, doesn't require iterating over keys.
	* Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of calling a function.
2. **Object.keys(window.obj).length === 0**:
	* Pros: Faster for small objects, as it directly checks the key count.
	* Cons: Requires more code, and may not be suitable for very large objects (due to memory constraints).
3. **!window.obj.length**:
	* Pros: Simple and straightforward, doesn't require any external libraries.
	* Cons: May be slower due to the overhead of the negation operator (`!`), and doesn't provide a clear indication of whether the object is empty.

**Library and its purpose**

The test uses Lodash's `_.isEmpty()` function. Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of functional programming helpers, including string manipulation, array manipulation, and more. In this case, `_.` is a shorthand for the Lodash library, making it easy to use their functions in code.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There doesn't appear to be any special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmarking test.

**Other alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative approaches to check if an object is empty, here are a few options:

* Using `Object.keys(window.obj).length > 0`: This approach has the same pros and cons as option 2.
* Using `window.obj === {}` or `window.obj === null`: These approaches have similar performance characteristics to option 3 but provide more clarity on whether the object is empty or not.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have varying levels of performance, readability, and suitability depending on your specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

_.isEmpty vs Object.keys.length vs .length (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.isEmpty vs Object.keys().length vs .length

Created: 7 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.isEmpty

Object.keys().length

.length

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):