Benchmark: ramda, lodash and ecmaS

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="//cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.27.0/ramda.js"></script>
<script src="//cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.15/lodash.fp.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var numbers = Array(100).fill().map((item, index) => index + 1);
var isEven = number => number % 2 === 0;

Tests:

Ramda
R.pipe(R.filter(isEven), R.map(x => x + 1))(numbers);
lodash
_.flow(_.filter(isEven),_.map(x => x + 1))(numbers);
EcmaS
numbers.filter(isEven).map(isEven);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Ramda
lodash
EcmaS

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/134.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 134 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Ramda	3288869.2 Ops/sec
lodash	344673.5 Ops/sec
EcmaS	4957405.5 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Description**

The benchmark is designed to test the performance of three different JavaScript libraries: Ramda, Lodash, and EcmaScript (ES). The benchmark consists of two parts:

1. Script Preparation Code: This code creates an array of 100 numbers and defines a simple function `isEven` that checks if a number is even.
2. Html Preparation Code: These are the HTML scripts that load the Ramda and Lodash libraries.

**Test Cases**

The benchmark has three test cases, each testing one of the three libraries:

1. **Ramda**: The benchmark uses the Ramda library's `pipe` function to filter the array of numbers for even values, add 1 to each remaining value, and then pipes it through another `map` function.
2. **Lodash**: The benchmark uses the Lodash library's `flow` function to chain together two functions: filtering the array of numbers for even values using `_filter`, and adding 1 to each remaining value using `_map`.
3. **EcmaScript (ES)**: The benchmark uses a simple ES expression to filter the array of numbers for even values, add 1 to each remaining value, without any additional library.

**Options Compared**

The three test cases are comparing the performance of:

* Ramda's `pipe` function vs. Lodash's `flow` function vs. plain ES code

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each approach:

* **Ramda's pipe**: Pros:
	+ More concise and readable syntax
	+ Can be more efficient due to the ability to compose functions together
	Cons:
	+ May require more overhead in terms of function creation and lookup
* **Lodash's flow**: Pros:
	+ Similar benefits to Ramda's `pipe` as above
	+ Has built-in support for many common operations (e.g., `_map`, `_filter`)
	Cons:
	+ Can be slower due to the added overhead of function calls
	+ May require more memory due to the creation of intermediate functions
* **Plain ES code**: Pros:
	+ Lightweight and minimalistic, with no additional library dependencies
	Cons:
	+ Requires more manual effort and readability may suffer

**Library Use**

Both Ramda and Lodash are functional programming libraries that aim to simplify and accelerate common operations. They provide a higher-order approach to programming, where functions are composed together using function pipes.

In the benchmark, both libraries are used for their filtering and mapping capabilities, which are essential for the test cases.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None of the test cases use any special JavaScript features or syntax that's not widely supported. The focus is on the performance difference between Ramda, Lodash, and plain ES code.

**Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternative libraries or approaches, here are a few options:

* For filtering and mapping: `Array.prototype.filter` and `Array.prototype.map` (ES built-ins)
* For functional programming: Other libraries like Svelte or Elm
* For concise syntax: Other functions composed together using closures or higher-order functions

Keep in mind that the choice of library or approach ultimately depends on your specific use case, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

ramda, lodash and ecmaS (version: 0)

check this out

Comparing performance of: Ramda vs lodash vs EcmaS

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Ramda

lodash

EcmaS

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 6 months ago):