Benchmark: lodash isEmpty vs ES6

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/g/lodash@4(lodash.min.js+lodash.fp.min.js)"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {
  a: 1,
  b: 2,
  c: 3,
  d: {
    a: 1
  },
  g: {
    a: {
      c: 1
    }
  }
}

Tests:

lodash fp
_.isEmpty(obj)
es6 map
const isEmptyObj = passedObj => !( (passedObj && passedObj === Object(passedObj) && Object.keys(passedObj).length !== 0) ) isEmptyObj(obj)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash fp
es6 map

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/138.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 138 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash fp	15587852.0 Ops/sec
es6 map	26528042.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark measures the performance difference between two approaches: using Lodash's `isEmpty` function and implementing a custom check for emptiness in JavaScript using ES6 features.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of:

1. **Lodash's `isEmpty` function**: A popular utility library that provides various functions for common tasks, including emptiness checks.
2. **Custom implementation using ES6 features**: A custom approach that uses the `Object.keys()` method and a conditional statement to check if an object is empty.

**Pros and Cons**

**Lodash's `isEmpty` function:**

Pros:

* Convenient and easy-to-use API
* Well-tested and widely adopted
* Reduces boilerplate code

Cons:

* Additional dependency (Lodash library)
* May incur overhead due to lazy loading or caching

**Custom implementation using ES6 features:**

Pros:

* No additional dependencies
* Optimized for performance, as it directly checks object properties
* Allows for fine-grained control over the check

Cons:

* Requires more code and boilerplate
* Less readable and maintainable for large objects or complex logic

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular utility library that provides various functions for common tasks, such as:

* Array manipulation
* Object manipulation (e.g., `isEmpty`, `cloneDeep`)
* String manipulation
* Functionality (e.g., `partial`, `curry`)

In this benchmark, Lodash's `isEmpty` function is used to check if an object is empty.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax:**

The custom implementation uses ES6 features such as:

* **Object.keys()**: Returns an array of property names in the given object.
* **Conditional statement (`&&`, `!`)**: Used for logical checks.

These features are part of the ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) standard and provide a concise way to express complex logic.

**Other Alternatives**

If you want to implement an emptiness check without using Lodash or ES6 features, you could use:

* **`Object.getOwnPropertyNames()`**: Similar to `Object.keys()`, but returns all properties (including non-enumerable ones).
* **`for...in` loop**: Iterates over the object's properties and checks if any of them are truthy.
* **`JSON.stringify()`**: Converts the object to a JSON string, which can be used to detect emptiness by checking for an empty string.

However, these alternatives may incur additional overhead or be less readable/maintainable than using Lodash's `isEmpty` function or the custom ES6 implementation.

Related benchmarks:

lodash isEmpty vs ES6 (version: 0)

...

Comparing performance of: lodash fp vs es6 map

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash fp

es6 map

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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