Benchmark: Lodash.js vs Native AndyDomFrankie

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.4/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var tests = {
	_emptyObj: {},
  	_emptyArr: [],
  	_zero: 0,
  	_emptyString: '',
  	_null: null,
  	_undef: undefined,
  	_falsy: false,
  	_notemptyObj: {a:1, b:2},
  	_notemptyArr: [1,2,3],
  	_notzero: 10,
  	_notemptyString: 'hello',
  	_notfalsy: true,
};

var myIsEmpty = (data) => (typeof data !== 'object' ? !data : data === null || !Object.keys(data).length);

var domIsEmpty = (data) => {
  if (typeof data === "object")
  {
    if(!data) return true;
    if (Array.isArray(data)) return !data.length;
    return !Object.keys(data).length
  }
  else
  {
    return !data
  }
}

var frankieIsEmpty = data => {
    return typeof data === 'object' && data !== null ? !Object.keys(data).length : !data;
  }

var testFunction = (fun) => Object.keys(tests).map((key) => fun(tests[key]))

Tests:

Lodash.js filter
testFunction(_.isEmpty);
Andy
testFunction(myIsEmpty);
Dom
testFunction(domIsEmpty);
Frankie
testFunction(frankieIsEmpty);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash.js filter
Andy
Dom
Frankie

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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/90.0.4430.93 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 90 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash.js filter	318287.7 Ops/sec
Andy	385489.4 Ops/sec
Dom	367863.9 Ops/sec
Frankie	393186.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and explain what's being tested, compared, and analyzed.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark compares the performance of three different implementations of an empty-checking function: `Lodash.js filter`, `Andy` (a custom implementation), and `Frankie` (another custom implementation).

**Test Cases**

There are four test cases:

1. **Lodash.js filter**: Tests the performance of Lodash's built-in `isEmpty` function.
2. **Andy**: Tests the performance of Andy's custom implementation of an empty-checking function.
3. **Dom**: Tests the performance of Dom's custom implementation of an empty-checking function.
4. **Frankie**: Tests the performance of Frankie's custom implementation of an empty-checking function.

**Comparison**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of these three implementations on a set of test data, which includes various types of objects and arrays (e.g., empty, non-empty, null, undefined).

**Library and Functions**

* **Lodash.js**: A popular JavaScript library that provides utility functions for functional programming. In this case, `isEmpty` is used as the built-in implementation.
* **Andy's function**: Not shown in the benchmark code, but presumably defined elsewhere.
* **Dom's function**: Not shown in the benchmark code, but presumably defined elsewhere.
* **Frankie's function**: Defined in the script preparation code, which takes an object as input and returns `true` if it is empty, and `false` otherwise.

**Special JS Features or Syntax**

None mentioned explicitly, but we can assume that these custom implementations use some basic JavaScript features like functions, objects, and array methods (e.g., `map`, `Array.isArray()`).

**Options Compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of three different implementations:

1. **Lodash.js filter**: Uses Lodash's built-in `isEmpty` function.
2. **Andy**: Uses Andy's custom implementation of an empty-checking function.
3. **Dom**: Uses Dom's custom implementation of an empty-checking function.
4. **Frankie**: Uses Frankie's custom implementation of an empty-checking function.

**Pros and Cons**

Here are some pros and cons for each implementation:

* **Lodash.js filter**:
	+ Pros: Uses a well-tested, widely-used library; easy to maintain and update.
	+ Cons: May introduce additional overhead due to the library's size and complexity.
* **Andy**: Not shown in the benchmark code, but presumably...
	+ Pros: Custom implementation might be optimized for specific use cases or requirements.
	+ Cons: Might require more maintenance effort to keep up with changes and updates.
* **Dom**: Not shown in the benchmark code, but presumably...
	+ Pros: Custom implementation might be optimized for specific use cases or requirements.
	+ Cons: Might require more maintenance effort to keep up with changes and updates.
* **Frankie**: Defined in the script preparation code...
	+ Pros: Custom implementation is tailored specifically to this benchmark's needs.
	+ Cons: May not be suitable for other use cases or requirements.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing an implementation, consider factors like:

* Performance: How does each implementation perform on your specific use case?
* Maintainability: How easy is it to maintain and update each implementation?
* Scalability: Can each implementation handle large datasets or complex inputs?
* Cost: What are the costs associated with using each library or custom implementation (e.g., licensing fees, development time)?

**Alternatives**

If you're not satisfied with these implementations or want to explore other options, consider:

1. **Built-in JavaScript functions**: Use built-in functions like `Object.keys()` and `Array.prototype.length` for empty-checking.
2. **Other libraries**: Explore alternative libraries that provide similar functionality, such as `Ramda` or `Underscore`.
3. **Custom implementations**: Create your own custom implementation tailored to your specific use case requirements.

Keep in mind that this benchmark is just one example, and there may be other factors to consider when choosing an implementation for your specific project.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash.js vs Native AndyDomFrankie (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Lodash.js filter vs Andy vs Dom vs Frankie

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Lodash.js filter

Andy

Dom

Frankie

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):