Benchmark: Test lodash v2 - MeasureThat.net

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var array = _.range(1000);

Tests:

Strict
_.reduce(_.filter(array, function(n) { return n > 998; }), function(acc, n) { acc.push({test: n}); return acc; }, []);
Lazy
_(array).filter(function(n) { return n > 998; }).reduce(function(acc, n) { acc.push({test: n}); return acc; }, []);
Lazy with one function
_(array).reduce(function(acc, n) { if(n <= 998) return acc; else { acc.push({test: n}); return acc; } }, []);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Strict
Lazy
Lazy with one function

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 explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is testing two approaches to filtering an array using Lodash, a popular JavaScript library for functional programming. The test cases are:

1. **Strict**: This approach uses `_.reduce` and `_.filter` in a strict, synchronous manner. It iterates over the filtered array and pushes each element into a new array.
2. **Lazy**: This approach uses `_` (the Lodash wrapper) and `_.filter` with a lazy function that returns an iterator. The `_.reduce` method then iterates over this iterator and pushes each element into a new array.
3. **Lazy with one function**: Similar to the Lazy approach, but it's implemented using a single function instead of two separate functions.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these three approaches:

* Synchronous filtering (Strict) vs. asynchronous filtering (Lazy and Lazy with one function)
* Using multiple functions vs. using a single function

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Strict**:
	* Pros: Easy to understand, simple implementation.
	* Cons: Can be slow due to synchronous iteration over the filtered array.
2. **Lazy**:
	* Pros: Asynchronous iteration can reduce overhead, potentially faster performance.
	* Cons: Requires understanding of iterators and asynchronous programming.
3. **Lazy with one function**:
	* Pros: Similar benefits to Lazy, but with a simpler implementation.
	* Cons: May require more memory due to the single-function approach.

**Lodash Library**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript library for functional programming. It provides a set of utility functions that make it easier to write concise and efficient code. In this benchmark, Lodash is used to provide a `_.range` function that generates an array with 1000 elements, which is then filtered and reduced.

**Special JS Features/Syntax**

This benchmark uses the following JavaScript features:

* ES6 syntax (e.g., arrow functions, template literals)
* Lodash's `_` wrapper for functional programming
* Iterators and asynchronous programming

Note that these features are not specific to this benchmark and are commonly used in modern JavaScript development.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're interested in alternatives to Lodash or different approaches to filtering arrays, here are a few options:

* Vanilla JavaScript: You can use the `Array.prototype.filter()` method directly without any additional libraries.
* Other functional programming libraries: Libraries like Ramda, Immutable.js, or Preact provide similar functionality to Lodash but with different APIs and focus areas.
* Custom implementation: Depending on your specific requirements, you might choose to implement a custom filtering algorithm without using any external libraries.

Keep in mind that each approach has its trade-offs, and the choice ultimately depends on your project's needs, performance requirements, and personal preference.

Related benchmarks:

Test lodash v2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Strict vs Lazy vs Lazy with one function

Created: 9 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Strict

Lazy

Lazy with one function

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):