Benchmark: [sited] Lodash vs native reduce

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/node-uuid/1.4.8/uuid.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.20/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

// Generate random collection
var data = []
for (var i = 0; i < 5000; i++) {
    data.push({
        name: uuid.v4(),
        number: Math.random() * 1000,
    })
}

Tests:

reduce-native
data.reduce(function (acc, o) {return o.name + acc})
reduce-lodash
_.reduce(data, function (acc, o) {return o.name + acc}, '')

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
reduce-native
reduce-lodash

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.

I'd be happy to help explain the benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark that compares two approaches for reducing an array of objects: the native `Array.prototype.reduce()` method and the Lodash `_.reduce()` function.

**Options compared**

Two options are being compared:

1. **Native Reduce**: The native `Array.prototype.reduce()` method, which is a built-in function in JavaScript that applies a reducer function to each element of an array, accumulating a result.
2. **Lodash Reduce**: The Lodash `_.reduce()` function, which is a utility function from the popular Lodash library that provides a more flexible and feature-rich way of reducing arrays.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

* **Native Reduce**:
	+ Pros:
		- Built-in function, no external dependencies required
		- Low memory overhead
		- Efficient performance
	+ Cons:
		- Limited flexibility in terms of custom reduction functions
		- May not work as expected with non-standard array types (e.g., objects instead of arrays)
* **Lodash Reduce**:
	+ Pros:
		- Highly flexible and customizable
		- Works well with non-standard array types
		- Provides a more readable and maintainable code style
	+ Cons:
		- External dependency required (Lodash library)
		- May have higher memory overhead compared to native reduce

**Library: Lodash**

The Lodash library is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as string manipulation, array manipulation, and more. The `_.reduce()` function is one of the many useful utilities provided by Lodash.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There doesn't appear to be any special JavaScript features or syntax being used in this benchmark.

**Other alternatives**

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

* **Array.prototype.forEach()**: While not suitable for reducing an array to a single value, `forEach()` can be used with a callback function that accumulates the results.
* **Array.prototype.map() + Array.prototype.reduce()**: This approach involves using `map()` to create a new array with the desired transformation, followed by `reduce()` to combine the results.

Keep in mind that these alternatives may have different performance characteristics and trade-offs compared to the native reduce and Lodash reduce approaches.

Related benchmarks:

[sited] Lodash vs native reduce (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: reduce-native vs reduce-lodash

Created: 5 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

reduce-native

reduce-lodash

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):