Toggle navigation
MeasureThat.net
Create a benchmark
Tools
Feedback
FAQ
Register
Log In
lodash forEach vs for i loop v2
(version: 0)
Comparing performance of:
lodash.forEach vs native
Created:
5 years ago
by:
Guest
Jump to the latest result
HTML Preparation code:
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/lodash/4.16.0/lodash.min.js"></script>
Script Preparation code:
var values = [{a: 30310}, {b: 100303}, {c: 3040494}]
Tests:
lodash.forEach
var count = 0; _.forEach(values, function(v,i) { if (v.a != null) { count++; } })
native
var count = 0; const len = values.length for (var i = 0; i < len; i++) { if (values[i].a != null) { count++; } }
Rendered benchmark preparation results:
Suite status:
<idle, ready to run>
Run tests (2)
Previous results
Fork
Test case name
Result
lodash.forEach
native
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 benchmark and its test cases. **Benchmark Definition** The benchmark measures the performance of two approaches to iterate over an array: using `_.forEach` from Lodash (a utility library) versus a traditional `for` loop with index iteration (`i`). **Options Compared** Two options are compared: 1. **Lodash `_.forEach`**: This approach uses the `forEach` function from Lodash, which is a higher-order function that iterates over an array and calls a callback function for each element. 2. **Traditional `for` loop with index iteration (`i`)**: This approach uses a traditional `for` loop to iterate over the array, where the variable `i` represents the index of each element. **Pros and Cons** **Lodash `_.forEach`** Pros: * More concise and expressive code * Easier to write and maintain for complex iteration scenarios Cons: * May introduce overhead due to the use of a higher-order function * Requires an additional library dependency (Lodash) **Traditional `for` loop with index iteration (`i`)** Pros: * Typically faster and more efficient, as it avoids the overhead of a higher-order function * No additional library dependencies Cons: * More verbose and less expressive code * May require more maintenance for complex iteration scenarios **Library: Lodash** Lodash is a utility library that provides a collection of functional programming helpers, including `forEach`. Its purpose is to simplify common tasks and make code more concise and readable. In this benchmark, Lodash's `forEach` function is used as the iteration approach. **Special JavaScript Feature/Syntax** None are explicitly mentioned in the provided benchmark definition. However, it's worth noting that the use of Lodash introduces a subtle dependency on this library, which may affect the overall test results. **Other Alternatives** If you were to modify or extend this benchmark, some alternative options to consider: * Using `Array.prototype.forEach` (instead of Lodash's `_.forEach`) * Implementing a custom iterator function * Comparing performance with other iteration approaches, such as using `map`, `filter`, or `reduce` * Adding additional variables or computations within the loop to simulate more realistic scenarios Keep in mind that each alternative may introduce new challenges and considerations, so be sure to carefully evaluate the trade-offs when modifying the benchmark.
Related benchmarks:
lodash .forEach vs JS forEach
lodash.each vs Object.forEach vs Native for
lodash forEach vs for i loop modified
lodash .foreach vs native foreach vs native forof
lodash .foreach vs native foreach vs native for loop
Comments
Confirm delete:
Do you really want to delete benchmark?