Benchmark: lodash .forEach vs JS forEach

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var value = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}, {d: 6542321}, {e: 13123531}]

Tests:

lodash
_.forEach(value, function(v,i) {console.log(v)})
native
value.forEach(function(v,i) {console.log(v)})

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash
native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/130.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 130 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash	21394.4 Ops/sec
native	26574.8 Ops/sec

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 its test cases.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches to iterate over an array in JavaScript: `_.forEach` (from the Lodash library) and the native `forEach` method.

**Options Compared**

The options being compared are:

1. **Lodash _.forEach**: A utility function from the popular Lodash library that provides a more functional programming style for iterating over arrays.
2. **Native JS forEach**: The built-in `forEach` method of JavaScript, which is a part of the standard library.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Lodash _.forEach**:
	+ Pros: Provides a concise and expressive way to iterate over arrays, can be used with other Lodash functions for more complex operations.
	+ Cons: Requires including an additional library, which might add overhead due to its size and complexity.
* **Native JS forEach**:
	+ Pros: Part of the standard JavaScript library, so no extra dependencies needed. Optimized for performance by the browser engine.
	+ Cons: Might be less readable or more verbose compared to Lodash's implementation.

**Library Use**

In this benchmark, the Lodash library is used to provide the _.forEach function, which allows users to compare its performance with the native JavaScript method.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being tested in this benchmark. Both approaches use a similar structure for iterating over arrays: providing an array and a callback function to execute on each element.

**Other Alternatives**

For iterating over arrays, other alternatives besides _.forEach and native `forEach` include:

* Array.prototype.forEach (a part of the standard JavaScript library)
* For...of loop (introduced in ECMAScript 2015)
* Map and Set iteration methods (for collections with more complex data structures)

Note that these alternatives might have different performance characteristics, readability, or use cases compared to _.forEach and native `forEach`.

Keep in mind that this benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two specific approaches within a JavaScript environment. The results should be taken as an indication of which approach is likely to be faster in similar scenarios, rather than a definitive measure for all possible use cases.

Related benchmarks:

lodash .forEach vs JS forEach (version: 0)

lodash vs native

Comparing performance of: lodash vs native

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

lodash

native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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