Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Ramda vs. Lodash equality
(version: 0)
Compares performance on the same task using Lodash vs Ramda vs Fastest Clone.
Comparing performance of:
Lodash vs Ramda without relying on currying or composition
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.min.js"></script> <script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js"></script> <script src="https://cdn.rawgit.com/ivolovikov/fastest-clone/master/index.js"></script> <script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/g/lodash@4(lodash.min.js+lodash.fp.min.js)'></script>
Script Preparation code:
// intial data var source = {a:1,b:1,c:1,d:1,e:1,f:1,g:1,h:{a:-1,b:1,c:1,d:1,e:1,f:1,g:1}}; var source2 = {a:1,b:1,c:1,d:1,e:1,f:1,g:1,h:{a:-1,b:1,c:1,d:1,e:1,f:1,g:1}};
Tests:
Lodash
var result = _.isEqual(source);
Ramda without relying on currying or composition
var result = R.equals(source);
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Lodash
Ramda without relying on currying or composition
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
11 months ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/18.5 Safari/605.1.15
Browser/OS:
Safari 18 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
Lodash
2455183.8 Ops/sec
Ramda without relying on currying or composition
84966408.0 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks. **Benchmark Overview** The provided benchmark, "Ramda vs. Lodash equality", compares the performance of two popular JavaScript libraries: Ramda and Lodash, for performing equality checks on an object. The benchmark also includes a third option, Fastest Clone, which is not a well-known library but claims to provide fast and efficient clone operations. **Benchmark Preparation Code** The preparation code sets up two objects, `source` and `source2`, with identical properties and values, except for the property `h` in `source` being an object with a negative value. The scripts include the necessary libraries: Ramda, Lodash, and Fastest Clone. **Test Cases** There are two individual test cases: 1. **Lodash**: The benchmark definition uses Lodash's `isEqual` function to compare `source` and `source2`. 2. **Ramda without relying on currying or composition**: This test case uses Ramda's `equals` function, which is a simple comparison function that returns `true` if the two arguments are equal. **Options Compared** The benchmark compares the performance of Lodash's `isEqual` function with Ramda's `equals` function. Fastest Clone is not used in this specific benchmark, but its presence indicates an interest in exploring alternative libraries for clone operations. **Pros and Cons** 1. **Lodash (`isEqual`)**: * Pros: Widely adopted and well-maintained library with a large community. * Cons: May have overhead due to its comprehensive feature set and multiple dependencies (e.g., fp.js). 2. **Ramda (`equals`)**: * Pros: More lightweight and focused on functional programming concepts, making it suitable for tasks like equality checks. * Cons: Smaller community compared to Lodash, which may impact support and documentation. **Other Considerations** When choosing a library for equality checks or clone operations, consider the following factors: 1. **Performance**: Benchmark different libraries and implementations to determine which one outperforms others in your specific use case. 2. **Feature set**: If you need additional features like data transformations or functional programming tools, consider Lodash's broader feature set. 3. **Community support**: Look for libraries with active communities and documentation, ensuring easier integration and troubleshooting. **Fastest Clone** As mentioned earlier, Fastest Clone is not a well-known library. It may provide fast clone operations, but its popularity and maintainability are unclear. If you're interested in exploring alternative clone libraries, consider: 1. **Lodash's `cloneDeep`**: A more lightweight option than Lodash's full clone functionality. 2. **Ramda's `clone`**: Provides a simple cloning function without the need for currying or composition. **Special JS Features/Syntax** There are no specific JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. However, if you're interested in exploring alternative approaches to equality checks or clone operations, consider: 1. **ES6 Object Equality Checks**: Use `===` and `!==` operators for simple object comparisons. 2. **JSON Serialization**: Compare objects by serializing them as JSON strings using `JSON.stringify()`. By understanding the pros and cons of each library and considering additional factors, you can make informed decisions about choosing the right library for your specific use case.
Related benchmarks:
Ramda vs. Lodash vs Fastest Clone
Ramda vs. Lodash equality2
Ramda vs. Lodash vs JSON.stringify equality
Rambda vs. Lodash equality
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?