Benchmark: immutable vs lodash vs ... 4

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.Map({}).setIn(['a', 'b', 'c', 'd'], ['1']).toJS();
lodash
var result = _.set({}, 'a.b.c.d', ['1']);
...
var result = {...data, ...{ a: { b: { c: { d: ['0'] } } } }};

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 24 days ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down what's being tested in this JavaScript microbenchmark.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of three approaches:

1. Immutable.js (also known as Immutable): A library for creating immutable data structures.
2. Lodash: A utility library that provides a lot of functional programming helpers, including one for setting nested values in an object.
3. Vanilla JavaScript: The built-in JavaScript language without any additional libraries.

**Options Compared**

The benchmark is comparing the performance of these three approaches when it comes to:

* Setting a nested value in an object. In this case, we have `a.b.c.d` as the key and `[ '0' ]` as the value.
* Immutable.js uses its `Map` data structure to create a new immutable object with the desired value set at the specified location.
* Lodash uses its `_set` function to achieve the same result.
* Vanilla JavaScript uses the spread operator (`{ ...data, ...{ a: { b: { c: { d: ['0'] } } } } }`) to create a new object with the desired value set.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Immutable.js**: Immutable provides a powerful way to create immutable data structures, which can lead to predictable and thread-safe code. However, it also adds overhead due to its indirections and function calls.
2. **Lodash**: Lodash is a utility library that provides many convenient functions for common tasks, including setting nested values in an object. Its `set` function is optimized for performance. However, using a separate library like Lodash may add overhead due to the need to include another file.
3. **Vanilla JavaScript**: Vanilla JavaScript is lightweight and doesn't require any additional libraries. However, it can be less readable and more error-prone than using a library or Immutable.js.

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash (formerly Underscore.js) is a utility library that provides many functions for common tasks in functional programming, including array manipulation, object manipulation, and more. Its `_set` function is specifically designed to set nested values in an object, making it a convenient choice for this benchmark.

**Special JS Feature: Spread Operator**

The spread operator (`{ ...data, ...{ a: { b: { c: { d: ['0'] } } } } }`) is a feature introduced in ECMAScript 2018 (ES2018) that allows you to create a new object by "spreading" an existing object's properties. This syntax can make code more concise and readable, but it may also be unfamiliar or harder to understand for some developers.

**Other Alternatives**

If you're looking for alternatives to Immutable.js or Lodash, you could consider:

* **Vanilla JavaScript only**: You could write a custom function to achieve the same result without using any libraries.
* **Immutable-like library**: If you need more advanced immutable data structures than what's provided by Immutable.js, you might look into other libraries like Redux or MobX.
* **Lodash alternatives**: There are many alternative utility libraries available, such as Moment.js for date manipulation, or Fast.js for performance-critical code.

Overall, the choice of approach depends on your specific use case, personal preference, and the desired balance between convenience, readability, and performance.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_6) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/14.0.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 14 on Mac OS X 10.15.6

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
immutable	1095188.9 Ops/sec
lodash	1677138.8 Ops/sec
...	2261017.8 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

immutable vs lodash vs ... 4 (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 24 days ago):