Benchmark: Lodash.js Each vs Native Objects Keys and Each

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var max1 = 100000; // 100,000 (100 Thousand)
var max2 = 10000000; // 10,000,000 (10 Million)
var max3 = 100000000; // 100,000,000 (100 Million)

var object = {};
for (var i = 0; i <= max1; i++) { object[i] = i; }

Tests:

Native each
Object.keys(object).forEach(function (element, index) { element = element*2; });
Lodash.js each
_.each(object, function (element, index) { element = element*2; });

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native each
Lodash.js each

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: using native JavaScript loops (`forEach`) versus using Lodash.js's `each` function to modify object keys in place.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **Native each**: This test case uses a native JavaScript `forEach` loop to iterate over the object keys and perform an operation on each key (doubling its value). The code is identical to what you'd write manually.
2. **Lodash.js each**: This test case uses Lodash.js's `each` function, which is a higher-order function that takes a callback function as an argument. In this case, the callback function doubles the value of each key.

**Library: Lodash.js**

Lodash.js is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various helper functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more. The `each` function in this benchmark uses Lodash.js's implementation, which wraps around the native JavaScript `forEach` loop.

**Native Features/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in these test cases beyond what's typically supported by modern browsers.

**Performance Considerations**

The main performance consideration here is how efficiently each approach modifies the object keys. In both cases, we're iterating over the keys and performing an operation on each one. However, using `each` from Lodash.js might be slightly slower than using native `forEach`, as it involves additional overhead due to the library's wrapper around the native loop.

That being said, for small datasets like this one (100 Thousand elements), the performance difference is likely to be negligible in practice. As the dataset grows larger, the performance differences between these approaches become more pronounced.

**Alternatives**

If you're interested in alternative implementations or optimizations for modifying object keys, here are a few options:

1. **Using `reduce()`**: Instead of using `forEach`, you can use `reduce()` to achieve the same result with a single loop.
2. **Using `Array.prototype.map()`**: Another way to modify object values is by using `map()`, which returns a new array with modified elements.
3. **Optimizations for large datasets**: For very large datasets, you might want to consider using more specialized data structures or algorithms that are optimized for performance.

In summary, the benchmark provides a simple comparison between native JavaScript loops (`forEach`) and Lodash.js's `each` function for modifying object keys in place. While there are some minor performance differences, they're unlikely to be noticeable in practice for small datasets like this one.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.js Each vs Native Objects Keys and Each (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native each vs Lodash.js each

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native each

Lodash.js each

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):