Benchmark: Lodash sortBy vs orderBy v2

HTML Preparation code:


<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/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 < 100000; i++){
  arr.push({value:getRandomInt(100)});
}

Tests:

_.sortBy
_.sortBy(arr,"value");
_.orderBy
_.orderBy(arr,"value");

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
_.sortBy
_.orderBy

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 benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark measures the performance difference between two functions from the Lodash library: `_.sortBy` and `_.orderBy`. These functions are used to sort an array of objects based on a specific key ("value" in this case).

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. `_.sortBy(arr, "value")`
2. `_.orderBy(arr, "value")`

Both functions take the same input: an array `arr` and a string key `"value"` to sort by.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **_.sortBy**: This function sorts the array in ascending order (i.e., smallest value first). The sorting is done in-place, meaning it modifies the original array.
	* Pros:
		+ Can be faster for small arrays or when a specific ordering is required.
		+ Less memory-intensive since it doesn't create a new sorted array.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be suitable for large datasets due to its in-place sorting nature, which can lead to slower performance and increased memory usage.
2. **_.orderBy**: This function sorts the array in descending order (i.e., largest value first) and returns a new sorted array without modifying the original.
	* Pros:
		+ Suitable for large datasets where preserving the original data is important.
		+ Returns a new sorted array, which can be useful if the original data needs to remain unchanged.
	* Cons:
		+ May consume more memory since it creates a new sorted array.
		+ Can be slower due to the creation of a new array.

**Library and Its Purpose**

The Lodash library is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like data manipulation, string manipulation, and functional programming. In this benchmark, Lodash is used to provide the `_.sortBy` and `_.orderBy` functions, which are designed to simplify array sorting and ordering.

**Other Considerations**

* **JavaScript Feature/Syntax**: The benchmark does not utilize any special JavaScript features or syntax. It's a straightforward comparison of two utility functions.
* **Alternatives**: Other libraries like Array.prototype.sort() or custom implementation can be used for array sorting. However, Lodash provides a convenient and efficient way to perform sorting tasks.

In conclusion, the benchmark measures the performance difference between two Lodash functions: `_.sortBy` and `_.orderBy`. The choice between these options depends on the specific use case, such as whether preserving the original data or optimizing for in-place sorting is more important.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash sortBy vs orderBy v2 (version: 0)

Lodash sortBy vs orderBy

Comparing performance of: _.sortBy vs _.orderBy

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

_.sortBy

_.orderBy

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):