Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
proper testing
(version: 0)
This test aims to show the important of representative tests
Comparing performance of:
Native reduce vs Lodash reduce
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Registered User
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 nbLength = 100000000 //100M var numbers = []; for (var i = 0; i <= nbLength; i++) { numbers.push(i); }
Tests:
Native reduce
//numbers.reduce((sum, n) => sum + n, 0) for(const n of numbers){ numbers.keys(); }
Lodash reduce
//_.reduce(numbers, (sum, n) => sum + n, 0) for(const n of numbers){ numbers.keys(); }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
Native reduce
Lodash reduce
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 dive into the world of JavaScript microbenchmarks on MeasureThat.net! The provided benchmark measures the performance of two approaches for reducing an array of numbers: the native `reduce()` method and the Lodash `reduce()` function. **Native reduce** The native `reduce()` method is a built-in JavaScript function that applies a reduction operation to each element in an array, accumulating a result. In this case, it's used to sum up all the numbers in the `numbers` array. Pros: * Fast and lightweight: Native code has direct access to hardware resources, making it generally faster than interpreted code. * Low memory overhead: Since native code is compiled to machine code, there's minimal overhead due to interpretation or parsing. Cons: * Limited flexibility: Native functions can't be easily customized or extended without modifying the underlying implementation. * Browser-specific: The behavior of native functions might vary between browsers or versions. **Lodash reduce** The Lodash `reduce()` function is a popular utility library that provides a more flexible and customizable alternative to the native `reduce()` method. It allows you to pass additional arguments, such as an initial value for the accumulator, and supports various iteration methods (e.g., `.keys()`, `.values()`, or `.entries()`). Pros: * Flexible: Lodash's implementation allows for more control over the reduction process, making it easier to customize or extend the functionality. * Browser support: As a widely used library, Lodash's `reduce()` function is likely supported by most modern browsers. Cons: * Additional overhead: Since Lodash is an interpreted library, there's some overhead due to parsing and execution of its code. * Larger memory footprint: Lodash has additional dependencies, which can increase the overall size of the application. **Library usage** In the provided benchmark, the `lodash.js` library is included via a CDN link (`https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js`). This allows users to easily test their code with Lodash's implementation without having to install or bundle the library themselves. **Special JS feature or syntax** In this benchmark, the `const` keyword is used for variable declaration, which has been a part of JavaScript since ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It helps ensure that variables are immutable by default, making the code more predictable and easier to reason about. No other special features or syntaxes are mentioned. **Alternatives** Other alternatives to measure performance comparisons in JavaScript include: * V8 Benchmark Suite: A set of benchmark tests for measuring performance differences between different JavaScript engines. * jsPerf: A website that allows users to create and share their own JavaScript benchmarks, with a focus on browser-specific performance comparisons. * Jest or Mocha: Testing frameworks that can be used to write unit tests and measure the performance of code. Keep in mind that these alternatives might have varying levels of support for specific browsers or versions, and may require additional setup or configuration.
Related benchmarks:
Lodash sort vs array.prototype.sort 321
Lodash max vs Math.max (lodash 4.7.11)
Lodash sort vs array.prototype.sortsr23ijo23rf fs a
Lodash vs Math (lodash 4.17.5) arr(5000)
Lodash.isArray vs Array.isArray (Lodash v4.17.15)
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?