Benchmark: immutable vs lodash vs ... 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/immutable/4.0.0-rc.12/immutable.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = {};

Tests:

immutable
var result = Immutable.Seq(data).set('a', '1').toObject();
lodash
var result = _.set(data, 'a', '1');
...
var result = {...data, 'a': '1'};

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
immutable
lodash
...

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring JavaScript performance is a fascinating topic!

Let's dive into the provided benchmark.

**What is being tested?**

The benchmark is comparing three approaches to update an object:

1. Immutable.js (represented by "immutable")
2. Lodash (represented by "lodash")
3. A custom approach (represented by the ellipsis, which I'll refer to as "native")

Each test case updates a JSON object with a new value for the key "a".

**Options compared:**

* **Immutable.js**: An immutable data structure library that ensures objects cannot be modified in place.
* **Lodash**: A utility library that provides functional programming helpers, including `_.set()`, which sets a value on an object.
* **Native**: The default JavaScript approach to updating objects using the assignment operator (`=`).

**Pros and Cons:**

* **Immutable.js**:
	+ Pros:
		- Ensures data integrity by creating a new object instead of modifying the existing one.
		- Can provide benefits for concurrency and parallelism, as changes are immutable.
	+ Cons:
		- May incur additional overhead due to the creation of a new object.
* **Lodash**:
	+ Pros:
		- Provides a concise and expressive way to update objects using functional programming principles.
	+ Cons:
		- Can introduce additional overhead due to the creation of a new object, similar to Immutable.js.
* **Native**:
	+ Pros:
		- Optimized for performance, as it uses the assignment operator (`=`) on the original object.
	+ Cons:
		- May lead to unintended side effects if not used carefully, as objects can be modified in place.

**Library and purpose:**

In this benchmark, Immutable.js is used to create an immutable sequence from a JSON object, which is then converted to an object using the `toObject()` method. Lodash's `_.set()` function is used to set a value on an existing object.

**Special JS feature or syntax:**

The benchmark does not use any special JavaScript features or syntax that would affect its performance.

**Other alternatives:**

If you're interested in exploring alternative approaches, here are some options:

* **ES6 Objects**: The native JavaScript approach using the assignment operator (`=`) on objects. While it's optimized for performance, it can lead to unintended side effects if not used carefully.
* **Memento.js**: Another library that provides an immutable data structure API, similar to Immutable.js.

Keep in mind that these alternatives might have different trade-offs in terms of performance, conciseness, and expressiveness, depending on your specific use case.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/95.0.4638.54 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 95 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
immutable	0.0 Ops/sec
lodash	4162317.8 Ops/sec
...	11799797.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

immutable vs lodash vs ... 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: immutable vs lodash vs ...

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

immutable

lodash

...

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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