Benchmark: lodash vs for-of vs forEach j

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

var obj = Array.from({ length: 10000 }).map((value, i) => i).reduce((val, v) => { val[v] = v; return val; }, {})

Tests:

lodash.each
_.each(obj, function(v,k) {const a = v + 'todo'})
native for-of w/ entries
for (const [k, v] of Object.entries(obj)) {}
native forEach w/ entries
Object.entries(obj).forEach(function(v, k) {})
vanilla for-loop w/ Object.keys
const keys = Object.keys(obj); for (let i = 0; i < keys.length; i++) { const v = obj[keys[i]] + 'todo' }
vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries
const entries = Object.entries(obj); for (let i = 0; i < entries.length; i++) { const [k, v] = entries[i] + 'todo' }
native for-in
for (const prop in obj) { if (obj.hasOwnProperty(prop)) { const v = obj[prop] + 'todo' } }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash.each
native for-of w/ entries
native forEach w/ entries
vanilla for-loop w/ Object.keys
vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries
native for-in

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/95.0.4638.69 Safari/537.36 Edg/95.0.1020.53

Browser/OS: Chrome 95 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash.each	3163.8 Ops/sec
native for-of w/ entries	1855.8 Ops/sec
native forEach w/ entries	1718.3 Ops/sec
vanilla for-loop w/ Object.keys	1047.4 Ops/sec
vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries	303.7 Ops/sec
native for-in	561.4 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the benchmark!

**Benchmark Definition**

The test case measures the performance of four different approaches to iterate over an object:

1. **Lodash `_.each()`**: Uses Lodash's `each` function to iterate over the object, modifying each value by appending `'todo'`.
2. **Native `for-of` with `Object.entries()`**: Iterates over the object using a `for-of` loop and accessing the values via `Object.entries()`, modifying each value by appending `'todo'`.
3. **Native `forEach` with `Object.entries()`**: Similar to the previous one, but uses the `forEach` method to iterate over the entries.
4. **Vanilla `for-loop` with `Object.keys()`**: Iterates over the object using a traditional `for` loop and accessing the values via `Object.keys()`, modifying each value by appending `'todo'`.
5. **Native `for-in`**: Iterates over the object's properties using the `for-in` loop, modifying each value by appending `'todo'`.

**Library**

The benchmark uses Lodash (version 4.17.5) as a library.

Lodash is a popular utility library for JavaScript that provides a lot of functional programming helpers, such as array and object manipulation functions. In this case, the `_.each` function is used to iterate over the object.

**Special JS features or syntax**

None mentioned in the benchmark definition.

**Options being compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of five different approaches:

1. Lodash `_.each()`
2. Native `for-of` with `Object.entries()`
3. Native `forEach` with `Object.entries()`
4. Vanilla `for-loop` with `Object.keys()`
5. Native `for-in`

**Pros and cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each approach:

1. **Lodash `_.each()`**:
	* Pros: Simple to use, well-documented.
	* Cons: Requires Lodash library, might not be optimized for performance.
2. **Native `for-of` with `Object.entries()`**:
	* Pros: Fast and efficient, uses native JavaScript features.
	* Cons: Might require more complex code, not as widely supported as other approaches.
3. **Native `forEach` with `Object.entries()`**:
	* Pros: Similar to `for-of`, but might be slightly slower.
	* Cons: Same limitations as `for-of`.
4. **Vanilla `for-loop` with `Object.keys()`**:
	* Pros: Widely supported, easy to understand.
	* Cons: Might not be the fastest option, uses more memory (due to the `Object.keys()` lookup).
5. **Native `for-in`**:
	* Pros: Simple and efficient.
	* Cons: Not as widely supported as other approaches, might have issues with symbol properties.

**Other alternatives**

If you need to iterate over an object, here are some alternative approaches:

1. Use a `Map` instead of an object if you need to store key-value pairs.
2. Use the `Array.prototype.forEach()` method or the `Array.prototype.entries()` method on an array version of your data structure.
3. Consider using a library like Ramda or Immutable.js for functional programming.

Remember, performance is often a trade-off between simplicity and optimization. The best approach depends on your specific use case and requirements.

Related benchmarks:

lodash vs for-of vs forEach j (version: 2)

Comparing performance of: lodash.each vs native for-of w/ entries vs native forEach w/ entries vs vanilla for-loop w/ Object.keys vs vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries vs native for-in

Created: 3 years ago by: Registered User

Jump to the latest result

lodash.each

native for-of w/ entries

native forEach w/ entries

vanilla for-loop w/ Object.keys

vanilla for-loop w/ Object.entries

native for-in

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):