Benchmark: includes vs lodash

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var dailyActivity = { type: 'SetGoals' };

Tests:

lodash
(() => { return !_.isEmpty(dailyActivity); })()
includes
(() => { return ['FirstSetGoals', 'SetGoals'].includes(dailyActivity.type); })()

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash
includes

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided benchmark definition and explain what's being tested.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches: using the `includes()` method ( native JavaScript) versus using the `_isEmpty()` function from the Lodash library.

**Test Cases**

There are two test cases:

1. **`lodash`**: This test case measures the execution time of the following code:
```javascript
(() => {
  return !_.isEmpty(dailyActivity);
})()
```
Here, `dailyActivity` is an object created with the script preparation code provided. The `_isEmpty()` function from Lodash is called on this object, and the result is negated (i.e., inverted) using the `!` operator.

2. **`includes`**: This test case measures the execution time of the following code:
```javascript
(() => {
  return ['FirstSetGoals', 'SetGoals'].includes(dailyActivity.type);
})()
```
In this test, an array containing two strings is created, and the `includes()` method is used to check if the `type` property of the `dailyActivity` object is present in that array.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of:

1. **Lodash `_isEmpty()`**: A utility function from Lodash that checks if an object or value is empty.
2. **Native JavaScript `includes()` method**: A built-in method for checking if a value exists within an array.

**Pros and Cons**

**Lodash `_isEmpty()`**:

* Pros:
	+ Widely used and well-maintained library.
	+ Provides a simple and consistent way to check for emptiness in various data structures (e.g., objects, arrays).
* Cons:
	+ Requires importing the Lodash library, which adds overhead due to the HTTP request and parsing time.
	+ May have slower performance compared to native JavaScript methods.

**Native JavaScript `includes()` method**:

* Pros:
	+ Built-in and therefore has lower overhead in terms of HTTP requests and parsing.
	+ Can be faster than Lodash functions for simple use cases.
* Cons:
	+ Requires manual handling of array bounds checking, which can add complexity to the code.
	+ May not provide consistent behavior across different browsers or environments.

**Other Considerations**

* Both test cases assume that `dailyActivity` is an object with a `type` property. If this assumption changes, the benchmark results may not be accurate.
* The benchmark does not account for potential performance differences due to browser caching, memory allocation, or other factors.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a comprehensive set of functions for various tasks, such as array manipulation, object transformation, and more. In this case, the `_isEmpty()` function is used to check if an object or value is empty.

In the provided benchmark definition, the Lodash library is imported using the `Html Preparation Code`, which includes the following line:
```javascript
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
```
This imports the Lodash library and allows it to be used in the test cases.

**Special JS Feature: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark definition. The focus is on comparing the performance of two different approaches: using a built-in method (`includes()`) versus importing an external utility library (`_isEmpty()` from Lodash`).

Related benchmarks:

includes vs lodash (version: 0)

lodash vs includes

Comparing performance of: lodash vs includes

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash

includes

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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