Benchmark: lodash forEach vs for i loop gungun

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 length = values.length for (var i = 0; i < length; ++i) { if (values[i].a != null) { count++; } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.forEach
native

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 3 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_4) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/88.0.4324.150 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 88 on Mac OS X 10.15.4

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash.forEach	3488265.5 Ops/sec
native	3490666.2 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

I'd be happy to help explain the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The provided JSON represents two test cases that compare the performance of JavaScript `forEach` loop and a traditional `for` loop with an index variable (`i`). The tests are designed to measure which approach is faster, in terms of executions per second.

**Options compared:**

Two options are compared:

1. **Lodash's `forEach` method**: This is a utility function from the popular JavaScript library Lodash. It provides a convenient way to iterate over arrays and objects.
2. **Native `for` loop with an index variable (`i`)**: This is a traditional, hand-crafted loop that uses a `for` statement to iterate over the array.

**Pros and cons of each approach:**

1. **Lodash's `forEach` method**:
	* Pros:
		+ Convenient and concise syntax.
		+ Reduces code duplication for common iteration patterns.
		+ Often written in production code, so it's familiar to developers.
	* Cons:
		+ May introduce additional overhead due to the indirection of calling a function on an array.
		+ May not be optimized as well as native loops for performance-critical paths.
2. **Native `for` loop with an index variable (`i`)**:
	* Pros:
		+ Typically optimized by the JavaScript engine for performance.
		+ Direct access to array elements without indirection.
		+ Can provide better control over iteration variables and termination conditions.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires more boilerplate code, which can lead to errors if not done correctly.
		+ Less familiar syntax compared to `forEach`, potentially leading to confusion.

**Library usage:**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks like string manipulation, array and object manipulation, and more. In this benchmark, Lodash's `forEach` method is used to demonstrate the performance difference between using a library function versus writing a native loop.

**Special JS features or syntax:**

None are explicitly mentioned in the provided JSON. However, it's worth noting that the use of template literals (`\r\n`) and the `RawUAString` field might be specific to the testing environment used by MeasureThat.net.

**Other alternatives:**

For comparison purposes, other alternatives could include:

* Other libraries or frameworks that provide iteration utilities (e.g., underscore.js, ramda).
* Custom-written loops using different iteration patterns (e.g., reduce, map, while loops).
* WebAssembly-based approaches for performance-critical code paths.

Related benchmarks:

lodash forEach vs for i loop gungun (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash.forEach vs native

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash.forEach

native

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated 2 months ago):