Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Lodash vs Lodash FP get
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Lodash FP vs Native
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Registered User
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.17.4/lodash.fp.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var state = { a: { b: {} } };
Tests:
Lodash FP
_.getOr({})('a.b')(state)
Native
_.getOr({}, 'a.b', state)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Lodash FP
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):
Let's dive into the explanation of the provided benchmark. **Benchmark Definition JSON** The provided benchmark definition is in JSON format, which describes two test cases: 1. **"Lodash FP"`**: This test case uses the Lodash library with functional programming (FP) style to access the `state` object. 2. **"Native"`**: This test case accesses the `state` object using the native JavaScript `getOr` method, without relying on any external libraries. **Options Compared** The two options compared in this benchmark are: 1. **Lodash FP**: Using Lodash with functional programming style to access nested objects. 2. **Native**: Accessing nested objects using native JavaScript methods (in this case, `getOr`). **Pros and Cons of Each Approach** **Lodash FP:** Pros: * Simplifies accessing nested objects by breaking them down into smaller, more manageable pieces. * Can be more readable and maintainable for complex object structures. Cons: * Requires additional library setup (Lodash) and imports. * May incur overhead due to the need to create a new scope or context for each access. **Native (`getOr`):** Pros: * No additional library dependencies required. * Often optimized for performance, as it's part of the native JavaScript implementation. Cons: * Can be less readable and more verbose than Lodash FP, especially for complex object structures. * May not provide the same level of abstraction or flexibility as Lodash FP. **Library: Lodash** Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for common tasks, such as array manipulation, object transformation, and functional programming. The `getOr` method in this benchmark is part of the Lodash library's functional programming features, allowing users to safely navigate nested objects. **Special JS Feature or Syntax: None** There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes used in this benchmark that would require explanation. **Other Alternatives** If you're looking for alternative libraries or methods for accessing nested objects, some options include: * **Query.js**: A lightweight, functional programming-inspired library for querying and manipulating data structures. * **Immutable.js**: A library for working with immutable data structures, which can be useful for concurrent programming and predictable behavior. * **Native alternatives to `getOr`**: Depending on the specific use case, other native methods might be more suitable, such as using `Object.getPrototypeOf()` or `JSON.parse()`. Keep in mind that the choice of library or method ultimately depends on your project's specific requirements, performance considerations, and personal preference.
Related benchmarks:
Lodash.get vs Property dot notation my test
lodash.get vs optional chaining
Lodash test suite
lodash.get vs optional chaining 2
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?