Benchmark: Loadash Merge vs Native merge

HTML Preparation code:

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

Tests:

loadash merge
var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my' }; var b = { c: 'goddess' }; var c = _.merge(a, b);
Native merge
var merge = (t,s)=>{const o=Object,a=o.assign;for(const k of o.keys(s))s[k]instanceof o&&a(s[k],merge(t[k],s[k]));return a(t||{},s),t} var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my' }; var b = { c: 'goddess' }; var c = merge(a, b);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
loadash merge
Native merge

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/98.0.4758.102 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 98 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
loadash merge	2601048.0 Ops/sec
Native merge	4110850.8 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 provided benchmark and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Overview**

The benchmark is designed to compare the performance of two approaches for merging objects in JavaScript: using the `lodash` library and implementing a custom merge function.

**Options Compared**

Two options are compared:

1. **Lodash Merge**: The benchmark uses the `_.merge()` function from the Lodash library, which provides a convenient way to merge two objects recursively.
2. **Native Merge**: The second option implements a custom merge function using a simple iterative approach.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

**Lodash Merge:**

Pros:

* Easy to use and understand
* Provides a robust implementation with support for recursive merging
* Reduces the risk of errors due to its well-tested codebase

Cons:

* Introduces an external dependency (the Lodash library)
* May have overhead due to the need to load and initialize the library

**Native Merge:**

Pros:

* No external dependencies, reducing overhead and complexity
* Allows for fine-grained control over the merging process

Cons:

* Requires more manual effort and understanding of the implementation
* May contain errors or bugs if not implemented correctly

**Library Used (Lodash)**

The Lodash library is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for common tasks, including array manipulation, string manipulation, and object merging. In this benchmark, the `_.merge()` function is used to perform the merging.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

None mentioned in this specific benchmark, but it's worth noting that some modern JavaScript features like `async/await`, classes, or es6+ syntax might be used in other benchmarks.

**Alternatives**

Other alternatives for object merging include:

* Using the built-in `Object.assign()` method
* Implementing a custom merge function using recursion or iteration (as shown in the Native Merge option)
* Using a dedicated library like `immer` or `deepmerge`
* Leveraging functional programming concepts, such as immutability and map/reduce

Keep in mind that each approach has its trade-offs and may be more suitable for specific use cases or performance-critical applications.

Related benchmarks:

Loadash Merge vs Native merge (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: loadash merge vs Native merge

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

loadash merge

Native merge

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):