Benchmark: Lodash vs native, reduce vs zipObject

HTML Preparation code:

function double(item, n) {  
	return n*2;
}
var data = [...Array(20)].map((v, idx) => idx);
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

function double(item, n) {  
	return n*2;
}
var data = [...Array(20)].map((v, idx) => idx);

Tests:

lodash zipObject
_.zipObject(data, _.map(double, data))
lodash reduce
_.reduce(data, (acc, cur) => { acc[cur] = double(cur); return acc; }, {});
es6 reduce
data.reduce((acc, cur) => { acc[cur] = double(cur); return acc; }, {});

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash zipObject
lodash reduce
es6 reduce

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one month ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/129.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 129 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash zipObject	1239320.2 Ops/sec
lodash reduce	930676.2 Ops/sec
es6 reduce	976368.4 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 JSON and explain what's being tested.

**Benchmark Definition**

The benchmark is comparing three JavaScript functions: `_.zipObject` from Lodash, and two native implementations of the `reduce` function in ES6 syntax (`data.reduce`).

**Options Compared**

* `_.zipObject`: A utility function from Lodash that creates a new object by zipping together key-value pairs from multiple arrays.
* Native `_.reduce`: The built-in `reduce` method in JavaScript, which applies a user-provided callback function to each element of an array, accumulating a result.

**Pros and Cons**

* **_.zipObject**:
	+ Pros: Easy to use, concise syntax, well-tested library.
	+ Cons: Adds dependency on Lodash, may have overhead due to library inclusion.
* Native `_.reduce` (ES6 syntax):
	+ Pros: No additional dependencies, optimized for performance, intuitive syntax.
	+ Cons: May require more code to achieve the same result as _.zipObject.

**Library and Purpose**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for various tasks, such as array manipulation, object transformation, and more. The `_.zipObject` function is one of its many utilities that helps simplify data processing tasks.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There is no specific special feature or syntax being tested in this benchmark. Both Lodash's `_.zipObject` and the native ES6 `reduce` functions use standard JavaScript features like arrays and objects.

**Other Alternatives**

If you need to create a zipped object, other alternatives besides using Lodash's `_.zipObject` include:

* Creating an object with a loop or using the `Object.keys()` method.
* Using libraries like Ramda (similar to Lodash) or Mochas (another JavaScript utility library).
* Implementing your own custom solution using basic JavaScript features.

**Benchmark Preparation Code**

The provided code sets up a test environment by:

1. Defining a simple function `double(item, n)` that takes an item and a multiplier as arguments.
2. Creating an array `data` with 20 elements, where each element is its index in the array (using `(v, idx) => idx`).
3. Including Lodash's `lodash.min.js` library for the _.zipObject function.

**Individual Test Cases**

Each test case measures the performance of one specific implementation:

1. `_.zipObject(data, _.map(double, data))`: Measures the time it takes to create a zipped object using Lodash's `_.zipObject`.
2. `data.reduce((acc, cur) => { acc[cur] = double(cur); return acc; }, {})`: Measures the time it takes to create a zipped object using native ES6 `reduce` syntax.
3. `data.reduce((acc, cur) => { acc[cur] = double(cur); return acc; }, {})`: Same as above, but without Lodash's library inclusion.

The latest benchmark results show the performance differences between these three implementations on Chrome 128 running on Windows 10.

Related benchmarks:

Lodash vs native, reduce vs zipObject (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: lodash zipObject vs lodash reduce vs es6 reduce

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

lodash zipObject

lodash reduce

es6 reduce

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):