Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash vs native foreach
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lodash vs native
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.10/lodash.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var value = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}, {d: 6542321}, {e: 13123531}]
Tests:
lodash
_.forEach(value, function(v,i) {console.log(v)})
native
value.forEach(function(v,i) {console.log(v)})
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lodash
native
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):
I'll break down the provided benchmark definition and test cases to explain what's being tested, compared options, pros and cons, and other considerations. **Benchmark Definition** The provided benchmark definition represents two JavaScript microbenchmarks: 1. `_.forEach(value, function(v,i) {console.log(v)})` - This benchmark uses Lodash (a popular utility library for JavaScript). 2. `value.forEach(function(v,i) {console.log(v)})` - This benchmark is a native JavaScript implementation, without using any libraries. **What's being tested?** Both benchmarks test the performance of iterating over an array using a custom callback function and logging each element to the console. The tests aim to compare: * Performance difference between Lodash's `_.forEach()` method and the native JavaScript implementation (`forEach()`). * Potential overhead introduced by using a library like Lodash. **Options compared** The benchmarks are comparing two approaches: 1. **Lodash (.forEach)**: Using the `_` (underscore) object from Lodash, which provides a convenient way to perform common tasks in JavaScript. 2. **Native JavaScript (forEach)**: Using the built-in `forEach()` method provided by modern JavaScript engines. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: 1. **Lodash (.forEach)**: * Pros: + Provides a convenient, familiar interface for iterating over arrays. + Can be beneficial for developers who are already comfortable with the Lodash API. * Cons: + Introduces an additional dependency (the Lodash library). + May introduce overhead due to the need to load and initialize the library. 2. **Native JavaScript (forEach)**: * Pros: + No additional dependencies or overhead. + Utilizes the optimized implementation provided by modern JavaScript engines. * Cons: + Requires familiarity with the native `forEach()` method. + May not be as convenient or familiar for developers who are used to working with libraries. **Library and its purpose** The library in this case is Lodash, a popular utility library for JavaScript. It provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as: * Iteration (e.g., `forEach()`, `map()`, `filter()`). * String manipulation. * Number and array operations. * And more. Lodash aims to provide a convenient, consistent way to perform common tasks in JavaScript, making it easier to write efficient, readable code. **Special JS feature or syntax** There are no special JS features or syntaxes being used in these benchmarks. The tests focus on comparing the performance of iterating over arrays using two different approaches. If you have any further questions or would like me to explain anything in more detail, feel free to ask!
Related benchmarks:
lodash .foreach vs native foreach
lodash .forEach vs JS forEach
Lodash foreach vs native foreach
lodash .foreach vs JS native foreach
lodash .foreach vs native foreach vs native forof
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?