Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
Ember vs Lodash vs Native JS
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
isNone vs isPresent vs isNil vs native
Created:
6 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ember.js/2.18.2/ember.min.js"></script> <script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var a = [{id: 1}, {id: 2, name: '2'}, {id: 3, data: {foo: 'bar'}}];
Tests:
isNone
Ember.isNone(a)
isPresent
Ember.isPresent(a)
isNil
_.isNil(a)
native
a === null || a === undefined
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (4)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
isNone
isPresent
isNil
native
Fastest:
N/A
Slowest:
N/A
Latest run results:
Run details:
(Test run date:
one year ago
)
User agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/128.0.0.0 Safari/537.36
Browser/OS:
Chrome 128 on Mac OS X 10.15.7
View result in a separate tab
Embed
Embed Benchmark Result
Test name
Executions per second
isNone
5273320.0 Ops/sec
isPresent
4640340.5 Ops/sec
isNil
5393237.5 Ops/sec
native
4260145.5 Ops/sec
Autogenerated LLM Summary
(model
llama3.2:3b
, generated one year ago):
Let's break down the provided JSON data to understand what's being tested in this JavaScript microbenchmark. **Benchmark Overview** The benchmark compares the performance of three different approaches: 1. Ember.js 2. Lodash.js 3. Native JavaScript (without any libraries) The test cases focus on checking the presence or absence of an object `a` with its properties. **Options Compared** Each test case uses a different approach to check if the object `a` is present, absent, or neither: 1. **Ember.isNone(a)**: Uses Ember.js's `isNone()` function to determine if `a` is null or undefined. 2. **Ember.isPresent(a)**: Uses Ember.js's `isPresent()` function to determine if `a` has any presence (i.e., not null or undefined). 3. **_.isNil(a)**: Uses Lodash.js's `isNil()` function to determine if `a` is null or undefined. 4. **native**: Checks manually using a simple conditional statement (`a === null || a === undefined`) in native JavaScript. **Pros and Cons** Here are some pros and cons of each approach: * **Ember.isNone(a)**: Pros - Ember.js provides a concise way to check for null or undefined values. Cons - It may introduce overhead due to the use of an external library. * **Ember.isPresent(a)**: Pros - Provides a clear indication of whether `a` has any presence, making it easier to reason about the code. Cons - Similar to Ember.isNone(), it introduces overhead from the library. * _.isNil(a): Pros - Lodash.js is widely used and provides a lightweight solution for checking null or undefined values. Cons - May not be as intuitive as native JavaScript's approach. * **native**: Pros - No external libraries are required, making it a lightweight option. Cons - Requires manual implementation, which can lead to errors if not done correctly. **Library Usage** In this benchmark, Ember.js and Lodash.js are used for their built-in functions `isNone()`, `isPresent()`, and `isNil()` respectively. These libraries provide concise ways to perform common operations, but may also introduce overhead due to the use of external code. **Special JS Features or Syntax** There is no explicit usage of special JavaScript features or syntax in this benchmark. However, it's worth noting that some of these libraries (e.g., Ember.js) are built on top of modern JavaScript features like ES6 classes and async/await. **Alternatives** Other alternatives for implementing this benchmark could include: * Using only native JavaScript with manual implementations for `isNil()` and `isPresent()`. * Using other libraries like Moment.js for date-related calculations, or React for building the UI (although these are not part of the provided JSON data). * Implementing a custom JavaScript implementation that combines elements from different libraries. Overall, this benchmark provides a good starting point for comparing the performance of Ember.js, Lodash.js, and native JavaScript in specific scenarios.
Related benchmarks:
lodash.keys vs Object.keys
lodash.keys vs Object.keys
lodash.keys [4.17.11] vs Object.keys
lodash get vs es6
Native Object.values().some() vs lodash _.some()
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?