Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash reduce vs native reduce
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
Native vs Lodash
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>
Script Preparation code:
var numbers = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
Tests:
Native
numbers.reduce((sum, n) => sum + n, 0)
Lodash
_.reduce(numbers, (sum, n) => sum + n, 0)
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Native
Lodash
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):
Let's break down the provided JSON benchmark definition and explain what's being tested. **Benchmark Name**: `lodash reduce vs native reduce` The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches: using JavaScript's built-in `reduce()` method and using Lodash's `reduce()` function. The goal is to measure which one is faster for a specific use case: summing up an array of numbers. **Options being compared**: * **Native Reduce**: Uses JavaScript's built-in `reduce()` method, which iterates over the array and accumulates the values in the accumulator variable. * **Lodash Reduce**: Uses Lodash's `reduce()` function, which is a wrapper around JavaScript's native `reduce()`. It provides additional functionality like memoization, but for this benchmark, we're only interested in its performance. **Pros and Cons of each approach:** * **Native Reduce**: + Pros: Built-in method, no additional dependencies required. + Cons: May not be optimized for performance or have features that Lodash provides. * **Lodash Reduce**: + Pros: Often faster due to optimization and caching, provides additional functionality like memoization. + Cons: Requires an external dependency (Lodash), may add overhead. **Library:** In this benchmark, Lodash is used as a library. It's a popular utility library that provides various functions for tasks like array manipulation, string manipulation, and more. The `reduce()` function in Lodash is optimized for performance and has features like caching to improve its speed. **Special JS feature or syntax:** There are no special JavaScript features or syntax mentioned in this benchmark. Both the native `reduce()` method and Lodash's `reduce()` function use standard JavaScript syntax. **Other considerations:** * The benchmark uses a specific array of numbers (`numbers`) for both tests, which is prepared using the provided Script Preparation Code. * The benchmark is run on Chrome 81 (Desktop) and Edge 81 (Desktop), indicating that it's testing performance in modern browsers. **Alternatives:** There are other alternatives to compare with Lodash's `reduce()` function, such as: * Other utility libraries like Underscore.js or Ramda * Built-in methods from ECMAScript, like `forEach()` or `for...of` * Custom implementations using loops or other programming paradigms However, the benchmark is focused on comparing Lodash's `reduce()` with the native JavaScript implementation, so these alternatives are not relevant to this specific comparison.
Related benchmarks:
Lodash reduce vs native
Lodash reduce vs native in for loop
Lodash reduce vs native (testing)
lodash reduce vs array reduce
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?