Benchmark: lodash forEach vs ramda forEach vs array.forEach vs for loop

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.26.1/ramda.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var values = [];

for(i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
    if (Math.random() > 0.5) {
      values.push({ x: true });
    } else { 
      values.push({ x: false });
    }
}

Tests:

lodash.forEach
let count = 0; _.forEach(values, v => { if (v.x) { count++; } });
array.forEach
let count = 0; values.forEach(v => { if (v.x) { count++; } });
for loop
const numValues = values.length; let count = 0; for (let i = 0; i < numValues; ++i) { if (values[i].x) { count++; } }
ramda.forEach
let count = 0; R.forEach(v => { if (v.x) { count++; } }, values);

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 8 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 8 runs

array.forEach

35K/s

ramda.forEach

23K/s

lodash.forEach

9K/s

for loop

2K/s

Fastest: array.forEach (16.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ array.forEach: 34,990 ops/sec
• ramda.forEach: 22,599 ops/sec
• lodash.forEach: 9,476 ops/sec
• for loop: 2,157 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.forEach
array.forEach
for loop
ramda.forEach

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/131.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 131 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

array.forEach

39K/s

ramda.forEach

20K/s

for loop

19K/s

lodash.forEach

9K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ array.forEach	39,292 Ops/sec
ramda.forEach	19,860 Ops/sec
for loop	19,474 Ops/sec
lodash.forEach	9,238 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested on MeasureThat.net.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance of four different approaches to iterate over an array:

1. **Lodash `forEach`**: uses the `_` (underscore) object from Lodash, which is a utility library for JavaScript.
2. **Array `forEach`**: uses the native `forEach` method on arrays.
3. **For Loop**: uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the array.
4. **Ramda `forEach`**: uses the `R.forEach` function from Ramda, which is another utility library for functional programming in JavaScript.

**Comparison of Approaches**

Here's a brief overview of each approach:

* **Lodash `forEach`**: This approach uses the `_` object to provide additional functionality on top of the native array methods. It can be convenient for certain tasks, but may add overhead due to the presence of this extra object.
* **Array `forEach`**: This is the most lightweight approach, using only built-in JavaScript features. It's a good choice when performance is critical and you want to avoid adding unnecessary dependencies.
* **For Loop**: While not the most elegant solution, traditional `for` loops can be effective for certain use cases. They provide direct control over the iteration process but require more manual effort to manage indices and loop termination.
* **Ramda `forEach`**: This approach uses a functional programming style, which can be beneficial when you want to abstract away low-level details and focus on higher-level logic. However, it may introduce additional overhead due to the complexity of the Ramda library.

**Library Usage**

In this benchmark:

* Lodash is used for its `_` object, which provides additional functionality on top of native array methods.
* Ramda is used for its `R.forEach` function, which is a higher-order function that takes an array as input and applies a given function to each element.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None of the approaches in this benchmark rely on special JavaScript features or syntax. They all use standard ECMAScript features.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative ways to iterate over arrays, you might consider:

* `forEach` with arrow functions (e.g., `values.forEach((v) => { /* code */ })`)
* `map`, `filter`, and other array methods that provide more functional programming-inspired abstractions
* Other libraries like jQuery or vanilla JavaScript alternatives like `reduce()` or `forEach` with custom callbacks

Keep in mind that each approach has its trade-offs, and the choice ultimately depends on your specific use case and performance requirements.

lodash forEach vs ramda forEach vs array.forEach vs for loop (version: 4)

Comparing performance of: `lodash.forEach vs array.forEach vs for loop vs ramda.forEach`

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

lodash.forEach

array.forEach

for loop

ramda.forEach

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 8 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 8 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

lodash forEach vs ramda forEach vs array.forEach vs for loop (version: 4)

Comparing performance of: lodash.forEach vs array.forEach vs for loop vs ramda.forEach

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

lodash.forEach

array.forEach

for loop

ramda.forEach

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 8 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 8 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `lodash.forEach vs array.forEach vs for loop vs ramda.forEach`