Benchmark: Some/Includes - Lodash VS ES6

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.15/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var array = ['http://', 'https://'];
var url = 'http://www.google.com';

Tests:

Lodash
_.some(array, (el) => _.includes(url, el));
ES6
const test = (el) => el.includes(url); array.some(test);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
ES6

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/120.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 120 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	1885605.1 Ops/sec
ES6	4260386.5 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of JavaScript microbenchmarks is crucial to understand how different approaches affect the execution speed.

The provided JSON data represents two test cases:

**1. Lodash vs ES6:**
This benchmark compares two ways to check if a string contains one of multiple values:
	* Using Lodash's `_.some()` function with a callback that includes the URL using `_._includes()`.
	* Using a simple ES6 method `string.includes()`.

Let's analyze the options:

**Lodash approach:**

Pros:

* Easy to read and maintain due to the high-level abstraction provided by Lodash.
* Potential performance benefits from Lodash's optimized implementation of the `some` function.

Cons:

* Adds overhead due to the creation of a new function and the need to import an external library (Lodash).
* May incur additional memory usage compared to the ES6 approach.

**ES6 approach:**

Pros:

* No additional libraries or overhead.
* Simple and easy to understand, making it accessible to developers without extensive JavaScript experience.

Cons:

* Requires knowledge of the `includes` method and its behavior with arrays.
* Might be slower due to the need for manual iteration over the array elements.

Other considerations:

* The choice between Lodash's `_.some()` and ES6's `string.includes()` will depend on the specific requirements of your project, such as performance needs or maintainability concerns.
* If you're using a modern JavaScript environment with good browser support, you might consider using other libraries like `Array.prototype.some()` or `Array.prototype.find()`.

The provided benchmark results show that the ES6 approach is slightly faster than Lodash in this specific test case. However, it's essential to note that performance differences may vary depending on the specific use case and JavaScript environment.

As for the library used by the test case, **Lodash** is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like string manipulation, array operations, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash is used to provide the `_.some()` function, which allows developers to write concise code without having to implement complex logic.

There are other alternatives to Lodash, such as:

* **Underscore.js**: Another popular utility library that provides similar functions to Lodash.
* **Array.prototype.some()** or **Array.prototype.find()**: Built-in JavaScript methods that can be used for array operations.

If you're interested in exploring alternative libraries or methods, I'd be happy to help!

Related benchmarks:

Some/Includes - Lodash VS ES6 (version: 0)

Comparison about how to check if string contains one of multiple values

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs ES6

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

ES6

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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