Benchmark: loop for freddie

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var values = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}]

Tests:

lodash.forEach
var count = 0; _.forEach(values, function(v,i) { if (v.a != null) { count++; } })
native
var count = 0; values.forEach(function(value) { if (value.a != null) { count++; } })

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.forEach
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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and understand what's being tested in this benchmark.

**Benchmark Overview**

MeasureThat.net is a website that allows users to create and run JavaScript microbenchmarks. The benchmark we're analyzing involves two test cases: `lodash.forEach` and `native`. We'll explore what each approach tests, their pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code for both test cases is the same:
```javascript
var values = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}];
```
This code defines an array `values` containing three objects with different properties. This setup ensures that both test cases will execute the same logic, making it easier to compare results.

**HTML Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code includes a script tag that loads the Lodash library:
```html
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>
```
This library is used in the `lodash.forEach` test case, which we'll discuss later.

**Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

### 1. `lodash.forEach`

The benchmark definition for this test case is:
```javascript
_.forEach(values, function(v,i) {
  if (v.a != null) {
    count++;
  }
});
```
This code uses the Lodash library's `_` alias to call the `forEach` method on the `values` array. The callback function iterates over the array and increments a counter whenever it encounters an object with a non-null `a` property.

**Pros:**

* The use of Lodash simplifies the code and reduces boilerplate.
* The test case is concise and easy to understand.

**Cons:**

* Adding a dependency on Lodash increases the benchmark's size and complexity.
* Some developers might not be familiar with Lodash or its API.

### 2. `native`

The benchmark definition for this test case is:
```javascript
values.forEach(function(value) {
  if (value.a != null) {
    count++;
  }
});
```
This code uses the built-in `forEach` method on the `values` array, without any external dependencies. The callback function iterates over the array and increments a counter whenever it encounters an object with a non-null `a` property.

**Pros:**

* This approach is smaller and more straightforward than using Lodash.
* It avoids adding an external dependency to the benchmark.

**Cons:**

* The code might be less readable due to the absence of Lodash's concise syntax.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash (Literally "a lot") is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a comprehensive set of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, functional programming, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash is used to simplify the `forEach` method invocation. The `_` alias is commonly used in Lodash code to access its functions.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There isn't any special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in these benchmarks. They focus on comparing the performance of two different approaches: using a library (Lodash) versus writing native code.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to run similar benchmarks, you can use other libraries like Underscore.js (a minimalist alternative to Lodash) or MooTools. You could also write your own benchmarking framework using JavaScript's built-in `Date` and `performance` objects to measure execution times.

Keep in mind that MeasureThat.net's benchmarks are designed to be small and focused on specific tasks, making them ideal for comparing different approaches and identifying performance differences.

Related benchmarks:

loop for freddie (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.forEach vs native

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.forEach

native

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):