Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
_.filter vs Array.filter
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Native JS vs Lodash
Created:
7 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.core.js"></script>
Tests:
Native JS
const arr1 = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]; const arr2 = arr1.filter(num => num % 2 === 0);
Lodash
const arr1 = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]; const arr2 = _.filter(arr1, num => num % 2 === 0);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Native JS
Lodash
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):
**Benchmark Overview** MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The provided benchmark compares the performance of native JavaScript's `filter()` method with Lodash's `filter()` function. **Test Cases** There are two test cases: 1. **Native JS**: This test case uses native JavaScript's `filter()` method to filter an array of numbers and return only the even numbers. 2. **Lodash**: This test case uses Lodash's `filter()` function to achieve the same result as Native JS. **Options Compared** The two options being compared are: * Native JavaScript's `filter()` method * Lodash's `filter()` function **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** ### Native JavaScript's `filter()` Method Pros: * Fast and lightweight, as it is a built-in function in the JavaScript engine. * Easy to understand and implement. Cons: * Can be slower than alternative approaches for very large datasets. * May not work well with complex filtering logic. ### Lodash's `filter()` Function Pros: * Provides more flexibility and control over the filtering process, especially when dealing with complex conditions. * Can handle large datasets efficiently due to its optimized implementation. Cons: * Requires an external library (Lodash), which adds latency and complexity to the benchmark. * May introduce additional overhead due to the need to load and initialize the Lodash library. **Library: Lodash** Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a comprehensive set of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, string manipulation, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash's `filter()` function is used to filter an array of numbers and return only the even numbers. **Special JS Feature/Syntax** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing the performance of two different approaches for filtering arrays. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative ways to implement filtering in JavaScript, some options include: * Using a custom loop and conditional statements to filter the array. * Using a library like jQuery's `filter()` function or other third-party libraries that provide similar functionality. * Implementing a more advanced filtering algorithm using techniques such as memoization or caching. Keep in mind that the performance of these alternatives may vary depending on the specific use case and requirements.
Related benchmarks:
lodash filter vs array.filter
Array.prototype.filter vs Lodash 4.17.5 filter
lodash.filter vs js native
Lodash.filter vs Lodash.without vs array.filter
Lodash filter VS native filter (with Lodash actually loaded)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?