Benchmark: Lodash isEmpty vs native .isArray + length

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var emptyArray = [];

Tests:

lodash
_.isEmpty(emptyArray);
native
Array.isArray(emptyArray) && emptyArray.length;

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash
native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 9 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/138.0.0.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/138.0.0.0

Browser/OS: Chrome 138 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash	22045204.0 Ops/sec
native	111539184.0 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of MeasureThat.net and explore what's being tested in this benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a benchmark that compares two approaches to check if an array is empty:

1. **Lodash `_.isEmpty()`**: This is a function from the Lodash library, which provides a utility function for checking if a value (in this case, an array) is empty.
2. **Native JavaScript `.isArray` and `length` methods**: These are built-in methods in JavaScript that can be used to check if an array is empty.

**Options being compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these two approaches:

* Lodash `_.isEmpty()`
* Native JavaScript `.isArray` and `length` methods

**Pros and Cons of each approach:**

1. **Lodash `_.isEmpty()`**
	* Pros:
		+ Convenient and readable code
		+ Can handle other types of empty values (e.g., null, undefined) in addition to arrays
	* Cons:
		+ Adds extra overhead due to the use of a library function
		+ May have slower performance compared to native methods
2. **Native JavaScript `.isArray` and `length` methods**
	* Pros:
		+ Fast and efficient, as it's a built-in method in JavaScript
		+ No external library dependencies or overhead
	* Cons:
		+ Can be less readable than using a utility function like Lodash
		+ May not handle other types of empty values out-of-the-box

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a collection of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, string manipulation, and more. The `_.isEmpty()` function checks if a value (in this case, an array) is empty by checking its length.

**Special JS feature/syntax: None mentioned in the provided benchmark**

There are no special JavaScript features or syntax being used in this benchmark.

**Benchmark preparation code**

The script preparation code creates an empty array `emptyArray` using the native JavaScript way: `var emptyArray = [];`

The HTML preparation code includes the Lodash library via a CDN, allowing the test to use its functions.

**Test cases**

There are two individual test cases:

1. The first test case checks if the `_.isEmpty()` function returns `true` when passed an empty array.
2. The second test case checks if the native `.isArray` and `length` methods return `true` when passed an empty array.

**Latest benchmark result**

The provided JSON shows the results of running the benchmark on a Chrome 90 browser on a Windows desktop:

* Lodash `_.isEmpty()` returns a higher number of executions per second (3748436.5) compared to the native approach.
* Native JavaScript `.isArray` and `length` methods return a lower number of executions per second (3723715.0).

**Other alternatives**

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

1. Using `Array.prototype.every()` instead of Lodash's `_.isEmpty()`: This method returns `true` if all elements in the array pass a test provided by the function.
2. Using a different utility library, such as Underscore.js or Ramda, which provide similar functionality to Lodash.

Keep in mind that each alternative may have its own trade-offs and performance characteristics.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash isEmpty vs native .isArray + length (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash vs native

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash

native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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