Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
jjkjkgjkj
(version: 0)
a
Comparing performance of:
l vs k
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var arr = [{id: 2, name: 'sa'},{id: 3, name: 'sa'},{id: 4, name: 'sa'},{id: 5, name: 'sa'},{id: 6, name: 'sa'}];
Tests:
l
_.find(arr, a => a.id %2 === 0);
k
arr.find(a => a.id %2 === 0);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
l
k
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):
I'll break down the provided JSON and explain what's being tested, the options compared, their pros and cons, and other considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark definition represents a JavaScript function that will be executed multiple times to measure its performance. In this case, there are two individual test cases: 1. `_.find(arr, a => a.id %2 === 0);` (Test Case "l") 2. `arr.find(a => a.id %2 === 0);` (Test Case "k") Both functions aim to find the elements in an array (`arr`) where the value of the `id` property is even. **Script Preparation Code** The script preparation code defines a JavaScript array: ```javascript var arr = [{id: 2, name: 'sa'},{id: 3, name: 'sa'},{id: 4, name: 'sa'},{id: 5, name: 'sa'},{id: 6, name: 'sa'}]; ``` This array has 5 elements with even `id` values. **Html Preparation Code** The HTML preparation code includes a reference to the Lodash library: ```html <script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script> ``` Lodash is a utility library that provides various functions for tasks such as string manipulation, array manipulation, and more. **Options Compared** The two test cases differ in the way they invoke the `find` function: 1. `_.find(arr, a => a.id %2 === 0);` (Test Case "l"): This uses the Lodash `_` symbol to access the `find` function from the Lodash library. 2. `arr.find(a => a.id %2 === 0);` (Test Case "k"): This uses the built-in `find` method on the `arr` array. **Pros and Cons** **Lodash approach (Test Case "l")** Pros: * Uses a well-known utility library with a wide range of functions. * Can provide more functionality than a simple `find` operation. Cons: * Requires an additional HTTP request to load the Lodash library, which can impact performance. * May introduce overhead due to the library's complexity. **Built-in approach (Test Case "k")** Pros: * No additional HTTP requests or library dependencies. * Simple and lightweight implementation. Cons: * Limited functionality compared to Lodash. * May not be as efficient for large datasets. **Other Considerations** * Both test cases use a simple `find` operation, which is relatively fast and efficient. * The benchmark result highlights the difference in performance between using Lodash and the built-in `find` method. In this case, the built-in approach is faster. * The benchmark results also show that Chrome 75 on a Desktop platform performs better than another browser on the same device. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for implementing the `find` function could include: * Using a different JavaScript library or framework that provides a similar functionality. * Implementing a custom `find` function from scratch using only built-in JavaScript methods and data structures. * Using a just-in-time (JIT) compiler or other optimization techniques to improve performance.
Related benchmarks:
circleTest
CircleSmallTest
lodash vs es6 in find method
Javascript array test
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?