Benchmark: Lodash.js vs Native testg

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var max1 = 100000; // 100,000 (100 Thousand)
var max2 = 10000000; // 10,000,000 (10 Million)
var max3 = 100000000; // 100,000,000 (100 Million)

var arr1 = [];
//for (var i = 0; i <= max1; i++) { arr1.push(i); }

var arr2 = [];
for (var i = 0; i <= max2; i++) { arr2.push(i); }

var arr3 = [];
//for (var i = 0; i <= max3; i++) { arr3.push(i); }

Tests:

Native
arr2.forEach(function (element, index) { element = element*2; });
Lodash.js filter
_.each(arr2, function (element, index) { element = element*2; });
Native for
for(var i = 0; i < arr2.length -1; i++){ arr2[i] = arr2[i]*2 }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native
Lodash.js filter
Native for

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.

I'll break down the provided benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three approaches:

1. Native JavaScript (using built-in functions like `forEach` and `for`)
2. Lodash.js (`_.each` function)

These two approaches are compared on an array of integers, which is populated with a large number of elements using a loop.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a set of functional programming helpers. The `_.each` function is a part of Lodash and is used to iterate over arrays or objects.

In this benchmark, the `_` symbol is an alias for the Lodash namespace. The `_.each` function takes two arguments: the array to be iterated over (`arr2`) and a callback function that will be executed for each element in the array (`function (element, index) {\r\n\telement = element*2;\r\n};`).

**Native JavaScript**

The Native JavaScript approach uses built-in functions like `forEach` and `for` to iterate over the array.

In this benchmark, the `forEach` function is used as a callback function for each element in the array (`arr2.forEach(function (element, index) {\r\n\telement = element*2;\r\n});`). The `for` loop is not used in this case because it's not necessary to populate the array with a large number of elements.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

* **Native JavaScript**
	+ Pros:
		- Built-in functions are widely supported across different browsers and environments.
		- Can be faster due to optimizations in the browser's engine.
	+ Cons:
		- May have limitations when dealing with large datasets or complex operations.
		- Can be slower than Lodash for simple operations like iteration.
* **Lodash**
	+ Pros:
		- Provides a more concise and readable way to write code for common tasks.
		- Supports larger datasets and complex operations due to its modular design.
	+ Cons:
		- Adds an extra dependency (the Lodash library).
		- May have slower performance compared to native functions for simple iterations.

**Other Considerations**

* **Performance**: The benchmark shows that the Native JavaScript approach is faster than Lodash for this specific use case. However, Lodash might be faster for more complex operations or larger datasets.
* **Readability**: Lodash can make code more readable by providing a clear and concise way to write common tasks. Native functions can be less readable due to their more verbose syntax.
* **Dependency**: Using Lodash adds an extra dependency (the library) that needs to be included in the project.

**Alternatives**

If you need to perform array iteration, you can use other JavaScript libraries or built-in functions like:

* `Array.prototype.map()`
* `Array.prototype.reduce()`
* `Array.prototype.filter()`

These alternatives might provide similar performance to native functions and are often more concise than Lodash. However, they may not support larger datasets or complex operations as well as Lodash.

In summary, the choice between Native JavaScript and Lodash depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference for code readability.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.js vs Native testg (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native vs Lodash.js filter vs Native for

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native

Lodash.js filter

Native for

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):