Benchmark: three lodash filter vs one native map

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var testArray = [];
for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) {
  testArray.push(Math.floor(Math.random(i * 1000) * 100))
}

Tests:

filter 3 time
function filterElement(testArray) { return testArray.filter(a => a<10) } filterElement(testArray); filterElement(testArray); filterElement(testArray);
one map
function mapElement(testArray) { return testArray.map(a => { if(a<10) return 10; if(a<20) return 20; if(a<30) return 30; }) } mapElement(testArray);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
filter 3 time
one 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.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided benchmark is designed to measure the performance difference between two approaches: using Lodash's `filter()` method and implementing a custom filtering function in JavaScript.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark tests how many executions per second (ipps) are possible for each approach. The test consists of two individual test cases:

1. **`one map`**: This test case uses the `map()` method to apply a conditional transformation to an array of random numbers.
2. **`filter 3 time`**: This test case filters an array of random numbers using Lodash's `filter()` method three times.

**Options compared**

The benchmark compares two options:

1. **Custom filtering function (one map)**: This approach uses the `map()` method with a custom callback function that applies conditional transformations to each element in the array.
2. **Lodash's filter() method (filter 3 time)**: This approach uses Lodash's built-in `filter()` method to filter the array.

**Pros and Cons of each approach**

**Custom filtering function (one map)**

Pros:

* Can be optimized for specific use cases
* May provide better performance due to reduced overhead from library functions

Cons:

* Requires manual implementation of the transformation logic
* May require additional setup and maintenance effort

**Lodash's filter() method (filter 3 time)**

Pros:

* Provides a lightweight and efficient way to perform filtering operations
* Built-in optimization and caching capabilities

Cons:

* May have some overhead due to library function calls
* Less flexible than custom implementation

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various functions for common tasks, such as array manipulation, string processing, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash's `filter()` method is used to filter the array.

**Special JS feature or syntax**

There are no special features or syntaxes mentioned in the provided code snippets. The test cases rely on standard JavaScript syntax.

**Other alternatives**

If you want to explore alternative approaches, here are a few options:

* Using `Array.prototype.filter()` instead of Lodash's `filter()`
* Implementing a custom sorting function using `Array.prototype.sort()` or a similar approach
* Using a different filtering library, such as Moment.js for date filtering

Keep in mind that each alternative may have its own pros and cons, and the performance results may vary depending on the specific use case.

Related benchmarks:

three lodash filter vs one native map (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: filter 3 time vs one map

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

filter 3 time

one 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):