Benchmark: ramda-path-vs-lodash-get

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.15/get.min.js"></script>
<script src="//cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/ramda@latest/dist/ramda.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var obj = {foo: {bar: {tar: [1,2,3]}}};

Tests:

ramda path
R.path(['foo', 'bar', 'tar', 2], obj)
lodash get
_.get(obj, 'foo.bar.tar.2')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
ramda path
lodash get

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; rv:137.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/137.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 137 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
ramda path	17322320.0 Ops/sec
lodash get	8274677.0 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 benchmark and explain what is being tested.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two individual test cases, each comparing the performance of a specific JavaScript function: `R.path` from Ramda and `_get` from Lodash. Both functions are used to access nested properties in an object.

**Options compared**

In this benchmark:

1. **Ramda's R.path**: This function takes an array of keys as its first argument, which represents the path to the desired property. The `obj` is the source object.
2. **Lodash's _get**: This function also takes two arguments: the source object (`obj`) and a string representing the path to the desired property.

**Pros and Cons**

* Ramda's R.path:
	+ Pros:
		- More explicit and intuitive API, as it explicitly defines the path.
		- Can be more flexible with custom paths or handling of edge cases.
	+ Cons:
		- May have a slightly higher memory footprint due to the array of keys being stored.
* Lodash's _get:
	+ Pros:
		- More concise and readable, as it uses a string-based path.
		- Typically includes additional features like default values for missing properties.
	+ Cons:
		- Less explicit about the intended path, which can lead to errors if the path is invalid.

**Library and its purpose**

1. **Ramda**: A functional programming library providing higher-order functions for data transformations, filtering, and more. In this benchmark, Ramda's R.path function is used to access nested properties in an object.
2. **Lodash**: A utility library providing a large collection of functional programming helpers, including array and object manipulation functions like _.get. Lodash's _get function is used to access nested properties in an object.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

None mentioned in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

For accessing nested properties in JavaScript objects, other options include:

1. **Bracket notation**: Using `obj['foo.bar.tar']` (or `obj['foo.bar.tar.2']`) directly.
2. **Destructuring assignment**: `const { foo: { bar: { tar } } } = obj;` followed by accessing `tar[2]`.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may not provide the same level of expressiveness or flexibility as Ramda's R.path or Lodash's _get.

In summary, this benchmark compares the performance of two functions for accessing nested properties in an object: Ramda's R.path and Lodash's _get. The choice between these options depends on your specific use case, personal preference, and priorities regarding code readability, memory usage, and potential features like default values or custom handling of edge cases.

Related benchmarks:

ramda-path-vs-lodash-get (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: ramda path vs lodash get

Created: 6 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

ramda path

lodash get

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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