Benchmark: Lodash.js vs Native Soryt/Min

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var list = [
  {a: 1, b: 'a'},
  {a: 2, b: 'b'},
  {a: 3, b: 'c'},
  {a: 4, b: 'd'},
  {a: 5, b: 'e'},
  {a: 6, b: 'f'},
];

function min(fn) {
  return (acc, item) => fn(acc) < fn(item || acc) ? acc : item;
}

Tests:

Native
list.reduce(min(item => item.a))
Lodash.js filter
_.sortBy(list, a => a.a)

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Native
Lodash.js filter

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.

**Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of two approaches:

1. Native JavaScript (without any libraries): This approach uses only built-in JavaScript functions to sort an array.
2. Lodash.js (a popular JavaScript utility library): This approach uses the `lodash` library to sort an array.

**Native JavaScript approach**

The native JavaScript approach is implemented using a custom `min` function that sorts an array in ascending order. The `min` function takes two arguments: `acc` (the accumulator) and `item` (the current item being processed). It returns `true` if the value of `fn(acc)` is less than the value of `fn(item || acc)` (i.e., if the accumulator value is greater than or equal to the item value), indicating that the accumulator should be returned.

The benchmark tests this approach by calling `list.reduce(min(item => item.a))`, which sorts an array `list` based on the values in each object, using the `min` function as the sorting criterion.

**Lodash.js approach**

The Lodash.js approach uses the `sortBy` function from the `lodash` library to sort an array. The `sortBy` function takes two arguments: the array to be sorted and a function that returns the sorting criteria for each item in the array.

In this benchmark, the `sortBy` function is used with the following function as the sorting criterion: `a => a.a`. This means that the array will be sorted based on the values of the `a` property in each object.

**Pros and Cons**

Both approaches have their pros and cons:

Native JavaScript approach:

Pros:

* Uses only built-in JavaScript functions, so no external dependencies.
* Can potentially be faster since it doesn't rely on a library.

Cons:

* May not be as efficient as the Lodash.js approach due to its custom implementation.
* Requires more code to implement the `min` function.

Lodash.js approach:

Pros:

* Uses an optimized and tested library, which can lead to better performance.
* Much less code is required compared to the native JavaScript approach.

Cons:

* Requires including an external library (lodash) in the test environment.
* May not be suitable for all use cases since it relies on a third-party library.

**Library: Lodash.js**

Lodash.js is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for common tasks, such as array manipulation, string manipulation, and object manipulation. The `sortBy` function is one of these utilities, which can be used to sort arrays based on specific criteria.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special JS features or syntaxes mentioned in the benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that the use of arrow functions (`=>`) is a relatively modern JavaScript feature that was introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6).

**Alternatives**

If you want to implement your own sorting algorithm without using any external libraries, you can consider implementing a merge sort or quicksort algorithm. These algorithms have an average time complexity of O(n log n), which is similar to the Lodash.js approach.

Alternatively, if you don't need the full functionality of the Lodash.js library, you can also consider using other JavaScript libraries that provide similar functionality, such as `lodash` alternatives like `ramda` or `underscore`.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.js vs Native Soryt/Min (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Native vs Lodash.js filter

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Native

Lodash.js filter

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):