Benchmark: Lodash min vs Math.min (lodash 4.7.11)

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.7.11/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

function getRandomInt(max) {
  return Math.floor(Math.random() * Math.floor(max));
}

var arr = [];
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++){
  arr.push({value:getRandomInt(100)});
}

Tests:

_.min
_.min(arr);
Math.min
Math.min(...arr)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.min
Math.min

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/144.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 144 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
_.min	9484.6 Ops/sec
Math.min	15358.7 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 definition and options being compared.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark is comparing two functions for finding the minimum value in an array:

1. `_.min(arr)` from Lodash library (version 4.7.11)
2. `Math.min(...arr)`

Both functions take an array as input and return the smallest element in the array.

**Options being compared:**

* **Lodash's `_.min()`**: This function is part of the popular Lodash utility library, which provides a collection of functional programming helpers. `_.min()` uses a custom implementation to find the minimum value in the array.
* **JavaScript's built-in `Math.min()`**: This is a standard JavaScript function that returns the smallest element among the values passed as arguments.

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Lodash's `_.min()`**:
	+ Pros:
		- Often more readable and concise than using `Math.min()`
		- May be faster due to optimized implementation
		- Part of a larger utility library with other useful functions
	+ Cons:
		- Additional dependency (Lodash library)
		- May add overhead due to the need to import and load the library
* **JavaScript's built-in `Math.min()`**:
	+ Pros:
		- No additional dependencies or overhead
		- Fast and efficient implementation
		- Always available without requiring additional libraries
	+ Cons:
		- May require more verbose code (e.g., using `...arr` syntax)
		- Less readable or concise than using `_.min()` from Lodash

**Library:**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of functional programming helpers. It's often used for tasks like array manipulation, object utilities, and more. In this case, the `_.min()` function is part of the Lodash library.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

There are no special features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark. The focus is on comparing two functions with different implementations.

**Other alternatives:**

If you need to find the minimum value in an array without using `Math.min()` from JavaScript, other alternatives might include:

* Using a custom implementation like Lodash's `_min()` function
* Utilizing a library or framework that provides a similar function (e.g., Ramda, Immutable.js)
* Implementing a simple loop-based approach to find the minimum value

Keep in mind that these alternatives may introduce additional dependencies or overhead compared to using the built-in `Math.min()` function.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash min vs Math.min (lodash 4.7.11) (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: _.min vs Math.min

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.min

Math.min

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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