Benchmark: 655125465465 - MeasureThat.net

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 = 10; i < len; i++) {
  var arr = []
  obj['key' + i] = arr
  for (var n = 0, len = 10; n < len; n++) {
    arr.push({ ['key' + n]: n });
  }
}

Tests:

Lodash
_.reduce(obj, (acc, val, key) => acc+' '+val, '')
Native
Object.entries(obj).reduce((acc, [key, val]) => acc+' '+val, '')

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.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Overview**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two approaches to reduce an object in JavaScript:

1. Using the `reduce()` method from Lodash library
2. Using the native `Object.entries()` and `reduce()` methods directly on JavaScript objects

**Options being compared**

We have two options being compared:

A) **Lodash**: Uses the `_.reduce()` method from the Lodash library, which is a popular utility library for functional programming in JavaScript.

B) **Native**: Uses the native `Object.entries()` and `reduce()` methods directly on JavaScript objects. This approach relies on the built-in functionality of modern browsers.

**Pros and Cons**

A) **Lodash**
Pros:

* Easier to read and maintain, especially for those familiar with functional programming
* Provides a consistent and predictable API for reducing objects

Cons:

* Adds an external dependency (the Lodash library), which may introduce overhead in terms of loading and execution time
* May not be optimized for performance, as it's a JavaScript function that needs to be executed on each execution

B) **Native**
Pros:

* No additional dependencies or overhead, as it uses built-in browser functionality
* Optimized for performance, as it bypasses the need for an external library

Cons:

* Requires familiarity with the `Object.entries()` and `reduce()` methods, which may not be intuitive for all developers
* May have varying levels of support across different browsers and versions

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a comprehensive set of functions for tasks such as functional programming, string manipulation, and more. The `_reduce()` method is one of its most commonly used functions, which applies a reduction function to each element in an array.

**Special JS feature/syntax**

The benchmark uses the `Object.entries()` method, which was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). This method returns an array of key-value pairs for the given object, where each pair is an array with the first element as the key and the second element as the value.

**Other alternatives**

If you were to use other libraries or approaches, some alternatives could be:

* Using a different utility library like Underscore.js or Ramda
* Implementing your own reduction function from scratch
* Using a JavaScript framework or engine that provides optimized performance, such as V8 (used by Chrome) or SpiderMonkey (used by Firefox)

However, these alternatives would likely introduce additional dependencies or overhead, and may not be as efficient or easy to maintain as the native `Object.entries()` and `reduce()` methods.

Related benchmarks:

655125465465 (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):