Benchmark: lodash map performanc vs es6

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.19/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

function double(n) {
	return n*2;
}
var data = [...Array(200)].map((v, idx) => idx);

Tests:

lodash map
_.map(data, double);
es6 map
data.map(double);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash map
es6 map

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):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of two approaches: using the Lodash library (`_.map`) versus the native JavaScript method (`data.map`).

**Options Compared**

* `_.map(data, double)`: This option uses the Lodash library to perform the mapping operation. The `double` function is an external function that takes a value `n` and returns its double.
* `data.map(double)`: This option uses the native JavaScript method for mapping arrays.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Lodash Library (`_.map`)**
	+ Pros:
		- Provides a convenient and expressive way to perform mapping operations, especially when working with complex data structures.
		- Often includes additional features like caching, iteration, and utility functions that can be beneficial in certain scenarios.
	+ Cons:
		- Introduces an extra layer of indirection, which can lead to slightly slower performance compared to native JavaScript methods.
		- Requires including the Lodash library in your codebase, which adds overhead in terms of size and latency.
* **Native JavaScript Method (`data.map`)**
	+ Pros:
		- Faster performance since it doesn't involve an additional layer of indirection.
		- Smaller binary footprint compared to using a library like Lodash.
	+ Cons:
		- Requires a deeper understanding of the underlying array data structure and its behavior.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for working with arrays, objects, and other data structures. The `_.map` function is part of this library, allowing developers to easily perform mapping operations on arrays without writing custom code. Lodash's purpose is to simplify common programming tasks and provide a standardized way of handling various edge cases.

**Test Case**

The test case uses the `double` function as an external function that takes a value `n` and returns its double. This function is not included in the benchmark definition itself but is instead loaded from an external source, likely due to its simplicity and lack of dependencies.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax: None**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax used in this benchmark beyond the standard features supported by modern JavaScript engines.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are a few options:

* **Using `Array.prototype.forEach`**: Instead of using `_.map`, you could use the `forEach` method to iterate over the array and apply the transformation function. This approach would eliminate the need for an external library.
* **Using a Custom Loop**: You could implement a custom loop that iterates over the array and applies the transformation function, avoiding the use of any libraries or built-in methods.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might not provide the same level of convenience as using Lodash's `_.map` function, but they can offer similar performance characteristics.

Related benchmarks:

lodash map performanc vs es6 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash map vs es6 map

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash map

es6 map

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

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