Benchmark: lodash vs Array.map vs spread operator

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var arr = new Array(10000000).fill(123);
var arr2 = []
for(i=0; i<1000000; i++) {
  var ascii = Math.floor((Math.random() * 25) + 97); 
  var str = String.fromCharCode(ascii); 
  arr2.push(str);
}

Tests:

lodash clone
_.clone(arr); _.clone(arr2);
Spread Operator
[...arr]; [...arr2];
Array.map
arr.map(x => x); arr2.map(x => x);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash clone
Spread Operator
Array.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 provided benchmark definition and test cases.

**Benchmark Definition:**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of three different methods to clone or transform arrays:

1. **Lodash**: A popular JavaScript utility library that provides a `clone()` method for creating shallow copies of objects, including arrays.
2. **Array.prototype.map()**: A built-in JavaScript method that applies a function to each element in an array and returns a new array with the results.
3. **Spread Operator (`...`)**: A syntax feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) that allows spreading elements of an array into a new array.

**Options Compared:**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these three options:

* Lodash's `clone()` method
* The spread operator (`...`)
* Array.prototype.map()

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach:**

1. **Lodash` clone()` method:
	* Pros:
		+ Creates a shallow copy of the original array, which can be useful in certain situations.
		+ Provides a simple and concise way to perform cloning operations.
	* Cons:
		+ May not be optimal for large arrays due to its overhead.
		+ Requires an additional dependency (Lodash library).
2. **Array.prototype.map()**:
	* Pros:
		+ Optimized for performance on modern browsers, making it a good choice for large datasets.
		+ Does not require any additional dependencies or libraries.
	* Cons:
		+ Creates a new array and copies all elements from the original array, which can be memory-intensive.
		+ May not be suitable for arrays that contain mutable objects (e.g., DOM elements) due to the creation of multiple layers in the DOM.
3. **Spread Operator (`...`)**:
	* Pros:
		+ Creates a new array with only the changed elements from the original array, making it memory-efficient.
		+ Does not require any additional dependencies or libraries.
	* Cons:
		+ Only works on modern browsers that support ECMAScript 2015 (ES6) syntax features.

**Library Used:**

In this benchmark, Lodash is used as a library for its `clone()` method. The `Html Preparation Code` section includes a script tag referencing the Lodash library, ensuring it is loaded and available for use in the benchmark.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax:**

The spread operator (`...`) is a syntax feature introduced in ECMAScript 2015 (ES6). It allows spreading elements of an array into a new array. This feature is not supported in older browsers, making it less suitable for cross-browser compatibility.

In summary, this benchmark compares the performance of three different methods to clone or transform arrays: Lodash's `clone()` method, Array.prototype.map(), and the spread operator (`...`). The pros and cons of each approach are highlighted, as well as the library used (Lodash) and any special JavaScript features/syntax (spread operator).

Related benchmarks:

lodash vs Array.map vs spread operator (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash clone vs Spread Operator vs Array.map

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash clone

Spread Operator

Array.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):