Benchmark: Lodash vs Native reduce on object 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

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

Tests:

Lodash
_.reduce(obj, (acc, val, key) => { acc[key] = val.map(d => ({ label: key, value: val })); return acc; }, {})
Native
Object.entries(obj).reduce((acc, [key, val]) => { acc[key] = val.map(d => ({ label: key, value: val })); return acc; }, {})

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'd be happy to explain the benchmarking test for you.

**What is tested:**

The provided JSON represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks that compare the performance of Lodash's `reduce` function with the native JavaScript array reduction method. The tests measure how long it takes to iterate over an object and transform its values using these two approaches.

**Options compared:**

1. **Lodash's `reduce` function**: A third-party library that provides a convenient way to reduce arrays and objects.
2. **Native JavaScript array reduction method**: Built-in JavaScript functionality that reduces arrays by iterating over their elements.

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

**Lodash's `reduce` function:**

Pros:

* Convenient and readable syntax
* Supports various array and object iteration methods (e.g., `forEach`, `map`)
* Ecosystem-wide support, as it is widely used in other libraries and frameworks

Cons:

* Adds an extra dependency (the Lodash library) to the test environment
* May introduce additional overhead due to the need for string manipulation and function calls

**Native JavaScript array reduction method:**

Pros:

* No dependencies or overhead added to the test environment
* Optimized for performance, as it leverages low-level language features

Cons:

* Requires more verbose syntax and careful attention to iteration details
* May not be as convenient or readable for complex transformations

**Other considerations:**

* The tests use a large object (`window.obj`) with 100 nested arrays, which may affect the results. This could also be seen as an overkill for most practical scenarios.
* Both approaches require the `window.obj` to be populated before running the test.

**Library and syntax used in the benchmark:**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for working with data structures, including arrays and objects. The `reduce` function is one of its flagship methods, allowing you to reduce arrays or objects by applying a transformation to each element.

The tests use Lodash version 4.17.4, which is an older but still widely supported version.

**Special JS features or syntax:**

None are explicitly mentioned in the benchmark, but it does utilize some advanced JavaScript concepts:

* `for...of` loops for iterating over arrays
* Arrow functions (`=>`) and template literals (`\r\n`) for concise code

Overall, these tests provide a clear comparison between two approaches to reducing arrays and objects in JavaScript.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash vs Native reduce on object 2 (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):