Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Map - Native vs Lodash vs Ramda vs Sanctuary 10,000
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Native vs Lodash vs Ramda vs Sanctuary vs Native for loop js
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://unpkg.com/lodash@4.17.11/lodash.min.js"></script> <script src="https://unpkg.com/ramda@0.26.1/dist/ramda.min.js"></script> <script src="https://unpkg.com/sanctuary-show@1.0.0/index.js"></script> <script src="https://unpkg.com/sanctuary-type-identifiers@2.0.1/index.js"></script> <script src="https://unpkg.com/sanctuary-type-classes@9.0.0/index.js"></script> <script src="https://unpkg.com/sanctuary-either@1.0.0/index.js"></script> <script src="https://unpkg.com/sanctuary-maybe@1.0.0/index.js"></script> <script src="https://unpkg.com/sanctuary-pair@1.0.0/index.js"></script> <script src="https://unpkg.com/sanctuary-def@0.18.1/index.js"></script> <script src="https://unpkg.com/sanctuary@0.15.0/index.js"></script>
Script Preparation code:
function double(n) { return n*2; } var data = [...Array(10,000)].map((v, idx) => idx);
Tests:
Native
data.map(double);
Lodash
_.map(data, double);
Ramda
R.map(double, data);
Sanctuary
sanctuary.map(double)(data);
Native for loop js
const mapped = [...data] for (let i = data.length; i--;){ mapped[i] = double(data[i]) }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (5)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Native
Lodash
Ramda
Sanctuary
Native for loop js
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):
Let's break down the provided benchmark and explain what is being tested, compared, and discussed. **Benchmark Overview** MeasureThat.net is testing the performance of four different approaches to map over an array: 1. Native (built-in JavaScript array method) 2. Lodash (a popular JavaScript utility library) 3. Ramda (another well-known functional programming library) 4. Sanctuary (a functional programming library with a focus on type safety) **Benchmark Definition JSON** The benchmark definition JSON contains the following information: * `Name`: The name of the benchmark, which is "Map - Native vs Lodash vs Ramda vs Sanctuary 10,000". * `Description`: An empty description. * `Script Preparation Code`: A JavaScript function that generates an array of 10,000 elements with incremental indices. This array will be used for mapping operations. * `Html Preparation Code`: A list of scripts that include various libraries (Lodash, Ramda, Sanctuary) and their dependencies. **Individual Test Cases** There are four test cases: 1. **Native**: Tests the built-in JavaScript array method `map`. 2. **Lodash**: Tests the `_.map` function from Lodash. 3. **Ramda**: Tests the `R.map` function from Ramda. 4. **Sanctuary**: Tests the `sanctuary.map` function from Sanctuary. **Options Compared** The four test cases compare different approaches to map over an array: * Native: Built-in JavaScript array method * Lodash: A popular JavaScript utility library with a `map` function * Ramda: Another well-known functional programming library with a `map` function * Sanctuary: A functional programming library with a focus on type safety, also providing a `map` function **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach: * Native: + Pros: Fast, efficient, and widely supported. + Cons: May not be as readable or maintainable as other approaches. * Lodash: + Pros: Well-documented, widely used, and provides a range of utility functions. + Cons: Adds external dependency (Lodash library), may be slower than native implementation. * Ramda: + Pros: Functional programming paradigm, provides a predictable and composable API. + Cons: May require additional learning curve due to functional programming concepts. * Sanctuary: + Pros: Focus on type safety, provides a strong foundation for functional programming. + Cons: May be slower than native implementation, requires additional learning curve. **Other Considerations** When choosing an approach, consider the following factors: * Performance: Native implementation is likely to be the fastest, but may not be as maintainable. Lodash and Ramda implementations may be slower due to added dependencies. * Readability and Maintainability: Sanctuary's type-safe API may make code more readable and maintainable, while Lodash provides a well-documented and widely used API. **Alternatives** If you're looking for alternatives to the four approaches tested in this benchmark: * For a purely functional programming approach without external dependencies, consider using a library like Immutable.js. * For a high-performance implementation without sacrificing readability, consider using a specialized array library like FastArray or Array.prototype.mapWithIndex.
Related benchmarks:
Map - Native vs Lodash vs Ramda vs Sanctuary
Map (Native vs Ramda vs Lodash) 5
Map (Native vs Ramda vs Lodash) latest 2021-01-18
Map (Native vs Ramda 0.27.2 vs Lodash 4.17.21) 50k
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?