Benchmark: array join vs _.join

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var elements = ["cat", "dog", "bat"]

Tests:

_.join
_.join(elements, ' ,')
array.join
elements.join(' ,')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.join
array.join

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; rv:137.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/137.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 137 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

array.join

21.4M/s

_.join

16.7M/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ array.join	21,420,060 Ops/sec
_.join	16,731,972 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks and explore what's being tested in this specific benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two individual test cases: `array.join` and `_.join`. These tests compare the performance of two different ways to concatenate arrays (or strings) using either native JavaScript functions or a popular utility library, Lodash.

**Options compared:**

1. **Native JavaScript `join()` method**: This is a built-in method that concatenates all elements in an array into a single string.
2. **Lodash `.join()` function**: This is a utility function from the Lodash library that provides a convenient way to concatenate arrays or strings.

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **Native JavaScript `join()` method**:
	* Pros:
		+ Built-in, no extra dependencies needed.
		+ Typically faster since it's implemented in native code.
	* Cons:
		+ Less convenient for users who aren't familiar with the method.
2. **Lodash `.join()` function**:
	* Pros:
		+ Convenient and easy to use, especially for developers who are already familiar with Lodash.
		+ Often provides more features and options compared to native JavaScript methods.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires an additional dependency (Lodash) to be included in the project.
		+ Might incur a slight performance overhead due to the additional function call.

**Library:**

The `_.join()` function is part of the Lodash library, which provides a comprehensive set of utility functions for tasks like array manipulation, string formatting, and more. The purpose of Lodash is to provide a convenient and consistent way to perform common operations in JavaScript, making it easier to write maintainable and efficient code.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There are no specific JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing the performance of two different methods for concatenating arrays (or strings).

**Other alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternative ways to concatenate arrays or strings, some other options include:

1. Using template literals (`"hello ${name}"` instead of `"hello " + name`)
2. Utilizing `Array.prototype.reduce()` to concatenate elements
3. Employing a simple loop to append elements

Keep in mind that the choice of method often depends on the specific use case, personal preference, and performance considerations.

I hope this explanation helps!

array join vs _.join (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `_.join vs array.join`

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

_.join

array.join

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

array join vs _.join (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: _.join vs array.join

Created: 7 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

_.join

array.join

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: `_.join vs array.join`