Benchmark: Loop over object: lodash vs Object.entries

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var obj = Array.from({ length: 10000 }).map((value, i) => i).reduce((val, v) => { val[v] = v; return val; }, {})

Tests:

lodash.each
_.each(obj, function(v, k) {})
lodash.map
_.map(obj, function(v, k) {})
Object.entries.map
Object.entries(obj).map(function([k, v]) {})
vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries
const entries = Object.entries(obj); for (let i = 0; i < entries.length; i++) { const [k, v] = entries[i]; }

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 29 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 24 runs

lodash.each

8K/s

lodash.map

8K/s

vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries

4K/s

Object.entries.map

4K/s

Fastest: lodash.each (2.3x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ lodash.each: 8,382 ops/sec
• lodash.map: 7,910 ops/sec
• vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries: 4,038 ops/sec
• Object.entries.map: 3,609 ops/sec

Firefox 5 runs

lodash.each

6K/s

lodash.map

4K/s

vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries

4K/s

Object.entries.map

3K/s

Fastest: lodash.each (2.0x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ lodash.each: 5,614 ops/sec
• lodash.map: 3,871 ops/sec
• vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries: 3,531 ops/sec
• Object.entries.map: 2,847 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.each
lodash.map
Object.entries.map
vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries

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; rv:140.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/140.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 140 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

lodash.each

9K/s

lodash.map

6K/s

vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries

5K/s

Object.entries.map

4K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ lodash.each	9,240 Ops/sec
lodash.map	5,937 Ops/sec
vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries	5,148 Ops/sec
Object.entries.map	4,264 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 JSON data and explain what's being tested in each test case.

**Benchmark Definition**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark, which is a small piece of code designed to measure the performance of specific parts of a larger program.

In this benchmark, four different approaches are compared:

1. **Lodash**: A popular JavaScript library that provides a set of utility functions for tasks like array manipulation, object iteration, and more.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript** (without Lodash): This approach uses only native JavaScript features without the aid of any external libraries.

The goal is to determine which approach is faster in terms of execution time.

**Options Compared**

The two main options being compared are:

1. **Lodash**: Using Lodash functions like `_.each` and `_.map` for array manipulation.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript**: Using native JavaScript features like `for...of` loops with `Object.entries` to iterate over the object.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Lodash**:
	* Pros: Easier to write code, less error-prone, and more readable.
	* Cons: Adds an external dependency (the Lodash library), which may increase overhead due to additional HTTP requests or file loading times.
2. **Vanilla JavaScript**:
	* Pros: No external dependencies, faster execution time due to reduced overhead.
	* Cons: More difficult to write code, and potential for more errors.

**Library**

In this benchmark, the Lodash library is used as a third-party dependency. Lodash provides a set of utility functions that can simplify code and improve performance in certain scenarios. The `_.each` function is used for iterating over an object's values, while the `_.map` function is used for transforming an array.

**Special JS Feature**

There is no special JavaScript feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. However, the use of `Object.entries` and `for...of` loops with it highlights some interesting aspects of modern JavaScript:

* `Object.entries`: A relatively new feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6), which allows iterating over an object's key-value pairs as arrays.
* `for...of` loops: A type of loop that can be used to iterate over arrays, objects, and other iterable values.

**Other Alternatives**

If you were to create a similar benchmark for another approach or library, some alternatives could include:

1. Using different libraries like Ramda, Underscore.js, or Moment.js.
2. Implementing custom solutions using native JavaScript features but without the use of external libraries.
3. Comparing the performance of different loop constructs, such as `for` loops versus `while` loops.

Keep in mind that benchmarking results can vary depending on factors like hardware, software configurations, and test environments, so it's essential to run multiple tests to ensure accurate conclusions.

Loop over object: lodash vs Object.entries (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: `lodash.each vs lodash.map vs Object.entries.map vs vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries`

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

lodash.each

lodash.map

Object.entries.map

vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 29 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 24 runs

Firefox 5 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

Loop over object: lodash vs Object.entries (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.each vs lodash.map vs Object.entries.map vs vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

lodash.each

lodash.map

Object.entries.map

vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 29 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 24 runs

Firefox 5 runs

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: `lodash.each vs lodash.map vs Object.entries.map vs vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries`