Benchmark: lodash shuffle vs js native

HTML Preparation code:

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

Script Preparation code:

const colors = [
    'from-indigo-500',
    'from-yellow-500',
    'from-purple-500',
    'from-red-500',
    'from-green-500',
    'from-blue-500',
    'from-pink-500',
];

Tests:

lodash shuffle
const colors = [ 'from-indigo-500', 'from-yellow-500', 'from-purple-500', 'from-red-500', 'from-green-500', 'from-blue-500', 'from-pink-500', ]; _.shuffle(colors)
js native shuffle
const colors = [ 'from-indigo-500', 'from-yellow-500', 'from-purple-500', 'from-red-500', 'from-green-500', 'from-blue-500', 'from-pink-500', ]; const shuffleColor = (array) => { const length = array === null ? 0 : array.length; return length ? array[Math.floor(Math.random() * length)] : undefined; };

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
lodash shuffle
js native shuffle

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one month 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 defines two test cases: `lodash shuffle` and `js native shuffle`. Both tests aim to measure the performance of shuffling an array of color strings.

**Options Compared**

The two options being compared are:

1. **Lodash (_.shuffle)**: A popular JavaScript library that provides a utility function for shuffling arrays.
2. **JavaScript Native**: The built-in `Math.random()` function, which can be used to shuffle an array by randomly selecting elements and swapping them.

**Pros and Cons**

**Lodash (.shuffle)**

Pros:

* Well-maintained and widely used library
* Provides a simple and efficient way to shuffle arrays
* Can handle large datasets without performance issues

Cons:

* Adds extra overhead due to the need to import and initialize the library
* May not be suitable for very small or specific use cases where simplicity is preferred

**JavaScript Native**

Pros:

* No additional overhead or dependencies required
* Fast and lightweight, making it suitable for small to medium-sized datasets
* Can be optimized further by leveraging the browser's built-in random number generator

Cons:

* Requires manual implementation of shuffling logic, which can lead to errors if not done correctly
* May not perform well on very large datasets due to the inherent randomness

**Library: Lodash**

Lodash is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides a wide range of functions for tasks such as array manipulation, string processing, and more. The `_.shuffle` function is part of this collection, providing a simple way to shuffle arrays in an efficient manner.

**Special JS Feature/Syntax**

There isn't any special JS feature or syntax being used in these benchmarks, apart from the use of template literals for string interpolation.

**Other Alternatives**

For shuffling arrays, other alternatives can be:

* `Array.prototype.sort()`: While not a perfect shuffle implementation, sorting an array and then reversing it can produce similar results.
* Custom implementation using `for` loops or recursive functions: These approaches can be optimized further but require manual effort to ensure correct behavior.

Keep in mind that the choice of shuffling algorithm depends on specific requirements, such as dataset size, performance constraints, and personal preference.

Latest run results:

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

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/16.1 Safari/605.1.15

Browser/OS: Safari 16 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
lodash shuffle	8317001.0 Ops/sec
js native shuffle	488941600.0 Ops/sec

Related benchmarks:

lodash shuffle vs js native (version: 0)

const shuffleColor = (array) => { const length = array === null ? 0 : array.length; return length ? array[Math.floor(Math.random() * length)] : undefined; };

Comparing performance of: lodash shuffle vs js native shuffle

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

lodash shuffle

js native shuffle

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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