Benchmark: find Lodash vs Vanilla

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = [
  {a: 'olo', b: 'trolo'},
  {a: 'trolo', b: 'sdf'},
  {a: 'olo', b: 'ewr'},
  {a: 'olo', b: 'dfgdf'},
  {a: 'trolo', b: 'trolo'},
]

Tests:

Lodash
var result = _.find(data, (o) => o.a === 'trolo')
Vanilla
var result = data.find( (o) => o.a === 'trolo')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash
Vanilla

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/136.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 136 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	30632542.0 Ops/sec
Vanilla	125108568.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the provided JSON data and explain what is being tested, compared, and their pros and cons.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark definition describes two test cases: finding an element in an array using Lodash (`_find`) versus Vanilla JavaScript (`find`). The purpose of this benchmark is to compare the performance of these two approaches.

**Script Preparation Code**

The script preparation code defines a sample array `data` with six elements, each containing two properties: `a` and `b`. This data will be used as input for both test cases.

**Html Preparation Code**

The HTML preparation code includes a reference to the Lodash library (`lodash.min.js`) from a CDN. This script will be executed before running either of the benchmark test cases.

**Individual Test Cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. **Lodash**: The first test case uses the `_.find` method from Lodash, passing an array callback function `(o) => o.a === 'trolo'`. This callback function filters the array and returns the first element where `a` equals `'trolo'`.
2. **Vanilla**: The second test case uses a traditional JavaScript `find` method (`data.find( (o) => o.a === 'trolo')`). This approach achieves the same filtering result as Lodash's `_find`.

**Pros and Cons**

**Lodash (`_.find`)**

Pros:

* Concise and expressive code
* Efficient use of abstraction, reducing boilerplate code
* Optimized for performance

Cons:

* Requires an external library (Lodash) to be included in the test environment
* May have additional overhead due to the library's initialization and dependencies

**Vanilla (`find`)**

Pros:

* No additional library dependencies or overhead
* Familiar syntax for JavaScript developers
* No abstraction layer, potentially closer to the underlying data structure

Cons:

* More verbose code than Lodash's `_find`
* May require more manual optimization for performance

**Other Considerations**

* The benchmark uses a relatively small sample array (`data`), which might not accurately represent real-world scenarios. Larger arrays or more complex data structures could yield different results.
* The test cases only examine the filtering performance of `_.find` and `find`. Additional benchmarks should be considered to assess other aspects of both libraries, such as their ease of use, error handling, and support for more advanced features.

**Alternative Libraries and Approaches**

If you're interested in exploring alternative JavaScript libraries or approaches for array manipulation and filtering, some options include:

* **Underscore.js**: Another popular utility library that provides various functions for working with arrays.
* **Mocha.js**: A testing framework that can be used to write more comprehensive benchmarks.
* **ES6 Array.prototype methods**: Vanilla JavaScript offers several optimized methods for working with arrays, such as `filter()`, `map()`, and `reduce()`. These approaches might provide different performance characteristics depending on the specific use case.

Keep in mind that each library or approach has its own strengths and weaknesses. When choosing a solution, consider factors like code readability, maintainability, and performance requirements for your project.

Related benchmarks:

find Lodash vs Vanilla (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash vs Vanilla

Created: 6 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

Lodash

Vanilla

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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